MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1766564823 · doi:10.25336/p69k6x

Back to the future: A review of forty years of population projections at Statistics Canada

2015· review· en· W1766564823 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Patrice Dion, Nora Galbraith

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Studies in Population · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographic statisticsProjections of population growthPopulationPopulation projectionPopulation statisticsRegional scienceGeographyDemographic analysisFertilityPopulation growthStatisticsResearch methodologyDemographyEconometricsSociologyEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to provide an overview of the population projections program at Statistics Canada, including its orientation, its strengths and challenges. We first identify some conceptual issues which have a bearing on how projections should be interpreted and evaluated. Then, we briefly review the past editions of Statistics Canada’s population projections and identify their main strengths and limitations. The evaluation considers the performance of previous projections at the national and provincial/territorial geographic levels and in terms of each of the major components of growth (fertility, mortality, and migration).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0160.031
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.095
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Studies in PopulationSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207