MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083816148 · doi:10.2747/0272-3638.28.7.635

Short-Term Residential Changes to Toronto's Immigrant Communities: Evidence from Lsic Wave 1

2007· article· en· W2083816148 on OpenAlexaffabout
K. Bruce Newbold, Pat DeLuca

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Geography · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationMetropolitan areaGeographyDemographic economicsPopulationSettlement (finance)Distribution (mathematics)DemographyEconomic geographySocioeconomicsSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Canada's biggest metropolitan area, Toronto has a large immigrant population and attracts a major proportion of the country's new arrivals. Although it is well known that new immigrant arrivals are highly mobile, there is limited understanding of how this mobility impacts settlement patterns, particularly in the period following arrival in Canada and at small spatial scales. Using Wave 1 of the Longitudinal Survey of Immigrants to Canada (LSIC) and a variety of spatial-analytical methods, this article examines the short-term evolution of Toronto's immigrant population over their first six months in Canada. The impacts of various individual and household characteristics are evaluated to determine reasons for mobility within the Toronto CMA, as well as in- and out-migration from the CMA. Results suggest that whereas mobility is high, new arrivals primarily remain in their initial destination with little difference in the overall distribution. Residential moves are associated with various individual and household characteristics, along with neighborhood effects and the type of housing initially occupied.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.443
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban GeographySame topicUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation StudiesFrench-language works237,207