MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123103308

Immigration And The Rate Of Population Mixing: Explorations With A Stylized Model

2016· preprint· en· W3123103308 on OpenAlexaff
Frank T. Denton, Byron G. Spencer

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStylized factPopulationImmigrationDemographic economicsPopulation sizeEconometricsLeslie matrixGeographyEconomicsDemographySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immigrants can mix with the population of a receiving country in various ways. We consider demographic mixing by which we mean cross-mating, and more particularly the bearing of children where one parent is of immigrant descent and the other is not - cross-parenting as we term it. We consider a hypothetical country with an initial stable population and introduce immigration. The results of cross-parenting are taken into account by identifying three separate populations within the overall total: non-immigrant population, immigrant population (immigrants and their descendants), and mixed population. We develop a stylized model to track the three populations, with interest focusing in particular on how the proportion of mixed population changes through time as it moves toward a steady state. The model has a stable projection (Leslie) matrix that holds for all three populations and moves them forward from generation to generation as each evolves in its own way. As cross-parenting occurs the resulting progeny are transferred from the other populations to the mixed population. The pattern of cross-parenting is determined in the first instance by a matrix representing preferences among the three populations and alternative preferential patterns are experimented with, ranging from complete isolation to indifference as to cross-parenting choices. However the matrix must be modified to recognize supply constraints imposed by the sizes of the available populations and a restricted least-squares procedure is employed to effect the modification while remaining as close as possible to the original preference pattern. Alternative rates of immigration are experimented with also.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207