Revers de fortune ou maintien de la reussite? Differences entre les cohortes au chapitre de la scolarite et des gains des immigrants enfants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".