MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803903581 · doi:10.3390/su10051647

Decision Making of Non-Agricultural Work by Rural Residents in Weifang, China

2018· article· en· W2803903581 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Cheng, Yuxia Lv, Mark W. Rosenberg, Linke Hou

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersBeijing Normal University
KeywordsUrbanizationChinaWork (physics)AgricultureEconomic growthArable landRural areaGeographyDescriptive statisticsSocioeconomicsBusinessPolitical scienceSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the 1990s, the rapid urbanization of China has been fueled by the massive movement of workers from the countryside to cities. Using descriptive statistics and binary regression analysis, we investigate the factors underlying rural residents’ decision making to seek non-agricultural work, their work time, and work location based on data collected in Weifang, a city in the Shandong Province of China. The results show that economic factors play a pivotal role in rural residents’ decision making to seek non-agricultural employment, full-time non-agricultural employment, or employment outside of their home county. Non-economic factors such as age, gender, social ties, education, access to arable land, geographical location, neighborhood effects, and self-perception are also significant factors in the decision-making process. The findings of this study shed light on future research regarding the impact of urbanization on rural residents. It also provides knowledge for future policy making on rural development and management.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.241 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicRural development and sustainabilityFrench-language works237,207