MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2252400498 · doi:10.3406/oss.2003.938

Les personnes âgées de demain : que peut nous dire l’analyse générationnelle ?

2003· article· en· W2252400498 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hervé Gauthier

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté Société et Solidarité · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographic economicsAutonomySocioeconomic statusPopulationEconomicsPopulation ageingWelfare economicsLabour economicsPolitical scienceSociologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In France and Québec, the older population is being replaced rapidly, though this will tend to slow down in the coming decades. The socioeconomic characteristics of tomorrow’s older population are partly known through the characteristics of younger generations who will be the older persons of tomorrow. By way of example, we selected certain characteristics that will influence the income of tomorrow’s older population: participation in the labour market, income level during working life, financial preparation for retirement, and status related to residential property. The male participation rates at the end of their working life are higher in Québec than in France. An important factor in the increase of income from one generation to the next is women’s income, which will likely continue to grow. Very positive effects on their retirement-specific income. With a property acquisition profile that is very different in both Québec and France, the rate of ownership has increased from one generation to the next. The income of family units is also increasing from generation to generation. Several data presented here indicate that the older population of tomorrow will have greater autonomy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSanté Société et SolidaritéSame topicAging, Elder Care, and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207