MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Generational Bridge

2016· other· en· W4232225611 on OpenAlex
Bárbara Barbosa Neves, Ana Alexandre Fernandes

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueEncyclopedia of Family Studies · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrandparentLongevityLife expectancyFertilitySolidarityAmbivalenceNegotiationBridge (graph theory)DemographyPopulationSociologyPsychologyGerontologySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPolitical scienceBiologyMedicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Generational bridges refer to inter‐ and cross‐generational relationships, being connections that help to negotiate family norms, roles, and expectations across generations. These bridges have become a trend because the global population is aging: the demographic changes that have occurred since the second half of the twentieth century, namely declines in fertility and mortality and an increase of life expectancy rates, have led to fast growth in the numbers of older (aged 65 and over) and oldest‐old (aged 80 and over) adults. These longevity gains have altered the structure of living generations, changing families: we now encounter a family structure with a higher number of living generations yet with fewer members of each generation. There has also been an increase in differences in ages and age ranges between generations, affecting family roles. To define these roles, for instance, parents may become a generational bridge between grandchildren and grandparents. Bridges based on intergenerational solidarity are essential for family relations and can mitigate intergenerational conflicts or ambivalence.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.312 · 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