MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214712736 · doi:10.1111/cars.12376

Administrative data linkage in Canada: Implications for sociological research

2022· article· en· W4214712736 on OpenAlex
Yoko Yoshida, Michael Haan, Scott Schaffer

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicContemporary Sociological Theory and Practice
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologySociological theorySociological researchPolitical scienceSocial sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores some of the implications that administrative data, defined as data initially collected for purposes other than research, will have for Sociology. Although administrative data are "found" rather than "made" and, in turn, pose several challenges, we argue that the potential of these data warrant the investment, and may lead to a new methodological imagination that can shed a light on time-tested concepts and advance our understanding of society. We show that it is already possible to advance several sociological debates through the use of administrative data and demonstrate the potential of these data through some examples drawn from classical sociological theory. We conclude by arguing that administrative data's potential will likely ensure that it becomes an important component of sociological research agendas in the coming years.

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.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.598
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.110 · 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