MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165946607

Income Prospects of British Columbia University Graduates

2001· preprint· en· W2165946607 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew Heisz

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2001
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicUnemployment and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraduation (instrument)EarningsOddsDemographic economicsDemographyEarnings growthEconomicsLogistic regressionMedicineAccountingSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a new dataset which combines the 1982-1997 tax records and administrative records of British Columbia bachelors graduates from the classes of 1974-96, the real market income of graduates is examined, focussing on changes in income between graduating cohorts, as well as differences across major fields of study. For men and women BC graduates, there has been a decline in real annual income received after graduation for more recent cohorts which is eventually offset by a higher growth rate in income. Also, annual incomes after graduation are relatively high for graduates with applied degrees such as in the engineering, education, and health fields, however, incomes converge as graduate cohorts age. The former finding is at odds with those of Beaudry and Green (1997) who found that weekly earnings declined across cohorts for male university graduates, with no offsetting rise in the growth rate (their results were more similar for women). Differences may be due to this paper's use of annual income as an outcome measure, or its focus on BC student's outcomes rather than national outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicUnemployment and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207