MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1877168929 · doi:10.25336/p6h30p

Longitudinal Research in Social Science: Some Theoretical Challenges

2001· article· en· W1877168929 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Thomas K. Burch

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Studies in Population · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicdemographic modeling and climate adaptation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversità di PisaRijksuniversiteit Groningen
KeywordsPositivismLogical positivismEmpirical researchEpistemologyLongitudinal dataSociology of scientific knowledgeSociologyLongitudinal studyPositive economicsComputer scienceManagement scienceSocial scienceEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Every advance carries with it potential problems, and longitudinal analysis is no exception. This paper focuses on the problems related to the massive amounts of data generated by longitudinal surveys. It is argued that a proliferation of data may be to the good but it will not necessarily lead to better scientific knowledge. Most demographers think the logical positivist way that theory arises out of empirical generalisations, but massive empirical investigations have only led to disappointing theoretical outcomes in demography. This paper discusses one way out of this impasse - to adopt a different view of theory, a model-based view of science. Theoretical models based on empirical generalisation should become the main representational device in science.

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)0.213
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.252
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2130.252
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.011
Science and technology studies0.0110.063
Scholarly communication0.0180.042
Open science0.0070.014
Research integrity0.0140.021
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.587
GPT teacher head0.545
Teacher spread0.043 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
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

Citations6
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Studies in PopulationSame topicdemographic modeling and climate adaptationFrench-language works237,207