MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140026356 · doi:10.25336/p65p73

An Evaluation of the Pearsonian Type I Curve of Fertility for Aboriginal Populations in Canada, 1996 to 2001

2008· article· en· W2140026356 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ravi B. P. Verma, Shirley Loh

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Studies in Population · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFertilityTotal fertility rateDemographyGeographyBirth rateCensusPopulationStatisticsMathematicsSociologyFamily planningResearch methodology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Studies in PopulationSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207