MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118680388 · doi:10.35632/ajis.v1i2.2801

Demographic Evolution of Pakistanis in America

2021· article· en· W3118680388 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Arif Ghayur

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Islam and Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle East
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiddle EastRest (music)GeographyPopulationSocioeconomicsDemographyEconomic growthEconomicsSociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the last head count in 1981 the total population ofPakistan was 83.782 millions. In addition, “there are two millionoverseas Pakistanis, more than one million left behind families and halfa million returnee migrants.” Let us assume that out of the 1.5 millionPakistanis who are working abroad at agiven time, 33.3 percent have anaverage of three dependents with them overseas. This brings the totalnumber of persons of Pakistani origin and their offspring abroad tothree million.It is estimated that over two-thirds of the working Pakistanis abroadare in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia, UAE, Libya, Kuwaitand Iraq. The rest of the total are working all over the world. After theMiddle East, their largest concentration points are England, the U.S.A.,Canada and Germany. Among the other countries with relativelysmaller-but significant numbers-of persons of Pakistani origin areBahrain, Oman, Qatar, Denmark, Singapore, Nigeria, Kenya, HongKong and Malaysia.Today Pakistan is one of the leading countries in exporting itsmanpower to the rest of the world. It is not an exaggeration of facts to saythat the foreign exchange sent home by the overseas Pakistanis iskeeping Pakistan afloat economically in these uncertain times. In 1983,close to three billion dollars were sent by overseas Pakistanis to theircountry. This is, again, one of the largest amounts sent by workers ...

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Islam and SocietySame topicPolitics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle EastFrench-language works237,207