La géographie du vieillissement au Canada atlantique: une analyse sous l’angle des disparités territoriales au cours de la période 1981–2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the example of other Canadian provinces, those in Atlantic Canada are affected, albeit to a lesser degree, by the increase in the number of persons aged 65 or over, a trend that we can define as gerontogrowth. In addition, this region of Canada seems particularly affected by the trend of an aging population, that is, the rise in the proportion of people in the total population aged 65 or more. For example, on a national scale, New Brunswick is the third oldest province according to the last five-year period (2001-2006), having advanced from the fourth position it held between 1981 and 2001 and from the fifth position occupied between 1971 and 1981. In addition, these trends evolve in different manners in different places, contrasts that are strongest at the regional and local level. The goal of this article is to examine the strength of these disparities during the period 1981 to 2006 and to identify some potential solutions for a territorial development strategy for seniors.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".