MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188818988

The Internet: A New Collection Method for the Census

2009· article· en· W2188818988 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anne‐Marie Côté, Danielle Laroche

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensusThe InternetData collectionPromotion (chess)GeographyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebSociologyPopulationPolitical scienceDemographySocial science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Major changes were made to the data collection process for the 2006 Census. One of those changes was the Internet response option, which was offered to all private households in Canada. Nearly one in five households chose to complete and return the questionnaire on-line. In addition, a new method of promoting Internet response was tested via the Internet Response Promotion (IRP) Study. The new approach proved very effective at increasing the on-line response rate. Planning for the 2011 Census, which is under way, calls for the use of a wave collection strategy, and wave 1 would be the IRP method. This paper provides an overview of Internet data collection in the 2006 Census – evaluations, results, lessons learned – and the methodology that will be used in the next census in 2011.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.671
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.303
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.208 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSurvey Methodology and NonresponseFrench-language works237,207