MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2273114726

People Aspects of Technological Change

2000· article· en· W2273114726 on OpenAlexaffabout
Don J. DeVoretz

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationBrain drainHuman capitalLoanBusinessInternational tradeInternational economicsEconomicsPolitical scienceFinanceLabour economicsEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

NAFTA as well as all other trade agreements create a debate over labor mobility provisions as a means of facilitating trade. In particular, temporary visa provisions in NAFTA increased the mobility of highly skilled Canadians to the United States. The resulting brain drain was unanticipated and complemented the rapid growth in bilateral trade and the net flow of financial capital from Canada to the United States in the 1990?s. This human capital outflow became a major policy issue by the mid-1990?s in Canada. Concerns over lost public finance and growth opportunities coupled with an inability to replace this lost manpower with traditional third world immigrants fuelled the debate in Canada. This paper suggests two policy tools to mitigate the impact of this NAFTA induced brain drain to the United States from Canada without reducing mobility provisions in the trade agreement. First a Canadian post-secondary contingent student loan scheme should be instituted to offset the value of the lost Canadian human capital and a private based immigrant recruiting mechanism in Canada is suggested to improve the quality of Canada?s replacement immigrants.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.010
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.003

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicMigration and Labor Dynamics→French-language works237,207→