Andrew W. Wister. Baby Boomer Health Dynamics: How Are We Aging?. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press, 2005.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RÉSUMÉ Le livre d'Andrew Wister offre un examen en profondeur du vieillissement en santé de la génération du baby-boom au Canada. À l'aide d'études portant sur plus de vingt années de données sur la santé des Canadiens, Wister évalue de quelle façon les baby-boomers vieillissent en lien présente avec trois principales démensions du mode de vie (tabagisme, consommation d'alcool et exercice). Le livre présente un examen critique du paradoxe exercice obésité – même si les baby-boomers d'aujourd'hui ont des comportements relativement plus sains, le taux d'obésité et de maladies chroniques s'est accru au fil du temps. Il apporte une contribution importante aux débats existants sur la façon dont les baby-boomers vieillissent, et ses conclusions soulèvent d'importantes réflexions tant pour la recherche que pour les politiques futures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.012 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".