MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2569179302 · doi:10.5539/res.v9n1p120

The Ecuadorian Amazon: A Data Analysis of Social and Educational Characteristics of the Population

2017· article· en· W2569179302 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gina Valdivieso, Efstathios Stefos, Ruth Lalama

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Cultures and Socio-Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of the Aegean
KeywordsUnderemploymentAmazon rainforestEthnic groupUnemploymentMarital statusData collectionPopulationFactorial analysisDescriptive statisticsPsychologyGeographyDemographySociologyStatisticsSocial scienceEconomic growthEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study describes the social and educational characteristics of the Ecuadorian Amazon population. For this purpose, the data obtained from the National Survey of Employment, Unemployment and Underemployment of 2014 was used in this research. A descriptive statistical analysis presents the frequency, the percentages and the graphs of the variables related to the area in which people live, gender, age, ethnic self-identification, language spoken, marital status and level of instruction. Other variables are the use of computer and internet, place of birth, reason why they live in the Amazon region, type of activity or inactivity, how do they feel in their jobs, and groups of occupation. Also, a factorial analysis was used to show the main and most important criteria of differentiation and the the clusters of people with similar characteristics.

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)0.003
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.336 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicIndigenous Cultures and Socio-EducationFrench-language works237,207