An Evaluation of the Pearsonian Type I Curve of Fertility for Aboriginal Populations in Canada, 1996 to 2001
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2005, Statistics Canada published new projections of the Aboriginal populations (North American Indians, Métis, and Inuit) in Canada, the provinces and territories from 2001 to 2017. To derive the number of births in these projections, the age-specific fertility rates were simulated by fitting the Pearsonian Type I curve using the projected fertility parameters: total fertility rates, mean ages of fertility, and modal ages of fertility. For the base period 1996 to 2001, the parameters were estimated from the age-specific fertility rates derived from the 2001 Census, using the “own-children method.” This paper evaluates the goodness of fit between the age-specific fertility rates developed by the Type I curve and the estimated age-specific fertility rates for Aboriginal identity groups for the period 1996 to 2001 for Canada and for high and low fertility regions. Tests of validity of the Type I curve indicate that this method is appropriate for estimating/projecting the number of births for the Aboriginal populations.
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 | 0.036 | 0.152 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".