MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1849684164

On the genesis of a new statistical regime: the case of Canada, 1800-2011

2011· article· en· W1849684164 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean‐Guy Prévost, Jean-Pierre Beaud

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCensus and Population Estimation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatistical analysisConsolidation (business)GlobalizationRegional scienceOfficial statisticsHistoryEconomic geographyGeographyPolitical scienceStatisticsLawEconomicsMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the paper is to examine and discuss some of the major transformations undergone by Canadian statistics with regard to structures, norms and practices (which can be envisioned as the defining traits of a particular statistical regime ) over the last two centuries or so, with passing reference to other national experiences. We distinguish four periods: before 1860, the British colonies of North America have evolved in an environment that we may describe as «proto-statistical»; from the mid-19th century to the eve of World War II, the course of Canadian statistics was defined by a progressive emergence of a «national» perspective; from the 1940s up to the 1980s, the development of the Canadian statistical system may be characterized as following two major trends, consolidation at the national level and consideration of the local, regional and provincial perspectives. The era of globalization has witnessed the advent of a new statistical regime, with its distinctive features, concerns and concepts. We examine more deeply three main aspects of this new statistical regime.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score0.935

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0210.013
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCensus and Population EstimationFrench-language works237,207