MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796562527 · doi:10.5604/01.3001.0014.1023

Self-employment in Poland — definitional problems, the availability of data and their interpretation

2016· article· en· W2796562527 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWiadomości Statystyczne The Polish Statistician · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolish Legal and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbiguityInterpretation (philosophy)UnificationSelf-employmentQuarter (Canadian coin)Work (physics)Scale (ratio)Political scienceComputer scienceGeographyEntrepreneurshipLawEngineeringCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article gives an overview of the definitions of „self-employment” and „self-employed” used both by the Polish and international institutions. Authors present a great ambiguity of the terms used. Due to the growing role of self-employment in the national economy authors postulate a modification of the classification of groups of self-employed and unification of concepts defining this category of work. A proposal for definition of self-employment was submitted for the purposes of Polish official statistics. The authors present the scale of self-employment in Poland in the fourth quarter of 2014 resulting from Polish labour force survey.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.279 · 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