MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098673277 · doi:10.1504/ijkbd.2010.035658

The creative class thesis and the mobility patterns of knowledge workers considering the place of birth: the case of Montreal

2010· article· en· W2098673277 on OpenAlexaffabout
Diane‐Gabrielle Tremblay, Sébastien Darchen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Knowledge-Based Development · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversité TÉLUQUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreative classIncentiveSkepticismHuman capitalProxy (statistics)AttractionQuality (philosophy)Class (philosophy)CreativitySociologyPsychologyEconomicsEconomic growthSocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The creative class thesis of economic development has had a major impact on the understanding of knowledge and creative workers and on the analysis of the mobility of human capital. Using quantitative and qualitative material, our paper examines the influence of quality of place and career opportunities on the mobility of students in science and technology fields as a proxy for the professional category of 'the knowledge workers'. Our results show that the criteria linked to quality of place has a greater impact on the attraction and retention of students from abroad than for the domestic-born groups. These results could partly confirm some of the assumptions of the creative class about the attraction of knowledge workers. However, we remain sceptical about urban policies that create incentives based solely on this thesis of economic development to attract talents or knowledge workers.

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)0.002
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Knowledge-Based DevelopmentSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207