MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911771107 · doi:10.1108/jes-11-2017-0346

Workopolis or The Pirate Bay: what does Google Trends say about the unemployment rate?

2019· article· en· W2911771107 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Economic Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicData-Driven Disease Surveillance
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnemploymentUnemployment rateOriginalityOrder (exchange)Predictive powerValue (mathematics)EconometricsEconomicsComputer scienceMacroeconomicsSociologySocial scienceMachine learningFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to use data mined from Google Trends, in order to predict the unemployment rate prevailing among Canadians between 25 and 44 years of age. Design/methodology/approach Based on a theoretical framework, this study argues that the intensity of online leisure activities is likely to improve the predictive power of unemployment forecasting models. Findings Mining the corresponding data from Google Trends, the analysis indicates that prediction models including variables which reflect online leisure activities outperform those solely based on the intensity of online job search. The paper also outlines the most propitious ways of mining data from Google Trends. The implications for research and policy are discussed. Originality/value This paper, for the first time, augments the forecasting models with data on the intensity of online leisure activities, in order to predict the Canadian unemployment rate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.294 · 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