Un système zonal de primes pour les travailleurs du Nord, un exemple de géographie appliquée
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study has been organized in three parts. First, there is a presentation of the main characteristics of the manpower in the Canadian North where there is a non adjustment between the demand and the supply of labour. Follow a review of the existing allowances regimes whose the most elaborated comes from the Treasury Board of Canada (1970 edition). Secondly, this paper deals with the rationale of the northern allowance itself and its global impact on the economy. A quantitative definition is given of the nordicity (northerness). Finally, the author suggests a System of package deal with only one indemnity for environment, cost of living and others excessive northern expenses. The level of this global bonus is given by the degree of nordicity (physical and human) in the site where the worker has his living. Any employee should receive a year around 900 dollars in the Lower Middle North but 2 100 dollars in the Far North. To discourage the great mobility of the workers, the basic indemnity grows with their persistance on the job. At last, to encourage the high qualified officers to go in the North, a special allowance may be given to them.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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.
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".