MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125044644

Revers de fortune ou maintien de la reussite? Differences entre les cohortes au chapitre de la scolarite et des gains des immigrants enfants

2011· article· fr· W3125044644 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Feng Hou, Aneta Bonikowska

Bibliographic record

VenueDirection des études analytiques : documents de recherche · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les connaissances actuelles concernant la reussite socioeconomique (au chapitre de la scolarite et des gains) des enfants d'immigrants sont fondees sur les experiences de ceux dont les parents immigrants sont venus au Canada avant les annees 1970. Depuis, des cohortes successives d'immigrants adultes ont connu une deterioration de leurs gains a l'arrivee. Cela a suscite des questions sur la possibilite que les resultats de leurs enfants aient change au fil du temps. La presente etude montre que les cohortes successives d'immigrants enfants qui sont arrives au Canada a l'age de 12 ans ou moins, au cours des annees 1960, 1970 et 1980, ont atteint des niveaux de scolarite de plus en plus eleves (mesures par la proportion de diplomes universitaires) que leurs homologues nes au Canada, de 25 a 34 ans. Conditionnellement au niveau de scolarite et a d'autres caracteristiques liees aux antecedents, les gains des immigrants enfants de sexe masculin arrives dans les annees 1960 etaient inferieurs a ceux du groupe de comparaison ne au Canada, mais les deux cohortes subsequentes avaient des gains semblables a ceux du groupe de comparaison. Les immigrants enfants de sexe feminin avaient des gains egaux a ceux de leurs homologues nes au Canada, a l'exception de la cohorte de 1980, qui avait des gains plus eleves.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDirection des études analytiques : documents de rechercheSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207