MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4211212866 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809132.018

Demography

2003· book-chapter· en· W4211212866 on OpenAlexaff
Dick Neal

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2003
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographicsDemographyPopulationPopulation growthAge structureGeographyStatisticsMathematicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Chapters 4 and 5, we examined different models of population growth where the structure of the population, in terms of age or size, was constant or unimportant and so could be ignored. However, we are well aware that such factors as sex and age have profound effects on the chances of an individual dying, or producing offspring, and so we need to incorporate some of these factors into our growth models. These vital statistics of populations are called demographics, and the study of these statistics is called demography. First, the pattern of mortality in relation to age is examined and quantified in Chapter 14. These age-specific death rates are combined with the age-specific birth rates in the following chapter to calculate the exponential growth rates of populations. Some populations with more complex growth characteristics cannot be modelled by the basic equations, and so matrix models of population growth are also introduced because they can be used to describe the growth of any population. Finally, Chapter 16 considers how the pattern of age-specific birth and death rates might have evolved by natural selection, followed by a brief review of the evolution of life-history traits of organisms.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.012

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooks→Same topicMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models→French-language works237,207→