Who Will Log in Maine's North Woods? A Cross-Cultural Study of Occupational Choice and Prestige
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Two distinct populations of loggers work in Maine's border counties with Quebec: Maine resident and Quebec resident woodsworkers. This study compared the sense of occupational choice and prestige held by these workers, as well as their sociodemographic attributes. Significant differences in age, education, and logging experience were found between these two populations. In addition, Maine resident loggers appeared to exhibit less resignation to woods work than their Quebec counterparts. However, Quebec resident loggers indicated that their profession was held in higher esteem among the public than did loggers from Maine. Over two-thirds of respondents from both populations would not encourage a son/daughter to be a logger, despite considerable familial attachment to logging. Results may have implications for logging labor supply, labor recruitment efforts, and logging mechanization in a region heavily dependent on the forest products industry. North. J. Appl. For. 21(4):200–208.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it