MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204370109

IDENTIFYING INTERNAL MOBILITY PATTERN DIFFERENCES WITHIN THE CANADIAN ARMED FORCES

2016· article· en· W3204370109 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michel G. Gauthier

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Strategy and Technology
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyEconomic geography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During their career, members of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) are frequently assigned to a new position and can even change profession. This high, but normal, level of mobility within the CAF can potentially hide indicators of mobility pattern differences among women and men. This article presents a method to study the mobility of the CAF members over the last decade. We propose a series of statistical tests to detect trends and identify a list of conditions for which the mobility indicators differ from one subpopulation to another. Our analysis uses Fisher’s exact test to compare various populations for which sizes can vary from very small (less than 50) to large (tens of thousands). Since our approach allows us to do tests of statistical significance on small samples, we were able to perform a detailed breakdown of the CAF population (down to the occupational level).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicMilitary Strategy and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207