Les générations X et Y du Québec, vraiment différentes des précédentes ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many myths surround the Generation X members. Among them, the term "McJobs" is often used to describe the difficulties they have experienced on the labour market. It is justified to claim that they had a more complicated career path in comparison with other generations. However, what is really going on? Who are they really? This paper paints a portrait of both the Generation X, whose members were born between 1965 and 1975, and of their successors, the members of the Generation Y, who were born between 1975 and 1985. More precisely, this research will put emphasis on some highlights about the behaviour of the X and Y in Quebec contemporary society. This study will examine the themes of family, their attitude toward the labour market and saving. In order to have a better understanding of the extent of the differences observed, both groups will be compared with the baby boomers [who were divided in two subgroups, the old boomers (1945-1954) and the young boomers (1955-1964)]. The research findings coming from this analysis are numerous. We learn, among other things, that the X and the Y have fairly different behaviours than the baby boomers. Overall, these two birth cohorts had to go through a clearly less comfortable situation than the baby boomers. However, we also learn that the situation experienced by the young boomers, in some areas, is not very distant from what the Generation X is going through. However, the X will have to invest a lot in order to face retirement issues.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.000 |
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.
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".