MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032212957 · doi:10.7202/020594ar

La population totale du Canada depuis 1600

2005· article· en· W2032212957 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Louis‐Edmond Hamelin

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers de géographie du Québec · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationGeographyIndigenousImmigrationDemographyPeriod (music)Population growthHistoryEthnologySocioeconomicsArchaeologySociologyBiologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An attempt is made to calculate the population of Canada since the period of discovery. The author bas made a few corrections to official statistics and bas added the figures for Newfoundland (prior to 1949) and for the Indians and Eskimos (prior to 1851). Throughout it is a question of the same territory, that of present-day Canada. Visualized in this fashion, the history of the population of Canada falls into jour periods : 1. 1600-1710 : The total population declined because the slow increase in European immigrants did not compensate for the decrease in numbers of indigenous peoples ; 2. 1710-1775 : The total population grew slowly during this period but, after two centuries of colonisation, Canada remained a land of Indians ; 3. In less than a century the total population soared from 300,000 to 3,000,000 ; never would Canada experience an equally long period characterized by such a high rate of demographic expansion. Canada became British ; 4. The present century bas seen jour demographic periods ; rapid increase took place during two of these periods : 1896-1914 and since 1942. The alternation of rates of growth emphasizes the sensitivity of the Canadian economy to both external and internal events.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.175 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers de géographie du QuébecSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207