MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113052019 · doi:10.1109/istas.1999.787352

Canada doubles enrollments of women in engineering in a decade

2003· article· en· W2113052019 on OpenAlexaffabout
Monique Frize

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)Carleton UniversityUniversity of OttawaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedressScience and engineeringWomen in sciencePolitical scienceEngineering researchEconomic growthEngineeringEngineering ethicsSociologyGender studiesTelecommunicationsLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following a report on the low participation of women in science and engineering ("Who Turns the Wheels", Science Council of Canada, 1985), there followed a decade of national strategies to redress the gender imbalance in these non-traditional fields and occupations. The participation of women in engineering undergraduate programs doubled during that period. In 1989, one industrial chair on Women in Engineering was created, and this led to several other national and regional efforts to remove obstacles and increase enrollments. In 1997, Canada multiplied its efforts greatly by appointing five new chairs for Women in Science and Engineering, to continue to develop and implement strategies in each region of Canada, coast to coast. A unique opportunity has been created to accelerate progress on all aspects of gender issues in this profession. The results expected from this level of activity and cooperation are bound to have a profound impact on the presence and recognition of women in these disciplines, and a successful outcome.

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)0.000
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 score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCareer Development and DiversityFrench-language works237,207