MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inclusion for all but Aboriginals in Canada

2007· book-chapter· en· W2482568285 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Soojin Yu, Anthony Heath

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Academy eBooks · 2007
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterImmigrationDisadvantagedFirst generationPopulationParity (physics)Inclusion (mineral)MulticulturalismPolitical scienceDemographic economicsGeographyEconomic growthDemographySociologyEconomicsGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is a classic country of immigration, with 21 percent of its working-age population being first generation and a further 9 percent second generation. It employs a ‘point system’ for selection of economic immigrants, and indeed the first generation proves to be highly educated (more so indeed than the charter population). While a number of visible minority groups in the first generation experience substantial disadvantages, in the second generation the one clearly disadvantaged group (in net terms) are the Caribbeans. Almost every other group in the second generation has achieved or surpassed parity with the charter group of the British. Whether this success of the second generation is due to Canadian policies of multiculturalism or to the lagged effects of the ‘point system’ for entry cannot be determined from these data. However, major disadvantages continue to be experienced by the Aboriginals both in employment and in occupational attainment.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0210.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.006

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Academy eBooksSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207