MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Ageing in China: Present situation and Strategies

2009· article· en· W1894372278 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
An Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatus quoPolitical sciencePopulation ageingHumanitiesChinaPopulationSociologyArtDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Population Ageing is the main feature of humankind development in the 21st century. It has become the hot problem concerned by the world’s governments and societies. This paper summarizes the basic present situation, the developmental trends and the basic features of population ageing in China. It also analyzes the responsibilities of national system, community construction and family providing for the aged and professional social workers in ageing trends. It intends to make suggestions about our social ageing trends. Key words: Ageing, Present situation, Strategy Resume: Le vieillissement de la populaton, caracteristique principale du developpement de l’humanite au 21e sicecle, constitue le point chaud auquel tous les gouvernements et toutes les societes accordent beaucoup d’attention. Cet article, en faisant le bilan du statu quo, de la tendance de developpement et des caracteristiques du vieillissement de la population chinoise, analyse les responsabilites du regime d’Etat, de la construction du quartier, de l’entretien de la vie des parents dans la famille ainsi que des benevoles professionnels dans la tendance de vieillissement, et ainsi etudie les contre-mesures. Mots-Cles: vieillissement, statu quo, contre-mesure

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social science→Same topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving→French-language works237,207→