MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Historical Evolution of Canadian Living Standards

2022· reference-entry· en· W4283029419 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vincent Geloso

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford Research Encyclopedia of Economics and Finance · 2022
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatin AmericansRest (music)GeographyPerspective (graphical)Standard of livingPolitical scienceGenealogyDevelopment economicsEconomyHistoryEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Canada is one of the richest countries in the world. It stands above most countries in the Americas. It is also noticeably poorer than its closest neighbor, the United States, despite considerable geographic similarity. These two facts have been true since as early as the 17th century. Why? An understanding of the historical path of Canada’s economic growth can be acquired by focusing on three important gaps in living standards within Canada: First Nations versus the rest of Canada, French Canadians versus English Canadians, and Atlantic Canada versus the rest of Canada. These three gaps allow an understanding of the crucial role of institutions in determining why Canada is rich on a global perspective and why it is poorer than the United States. However, explanations as to why Canada grew faster than Latin America are more speculative.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford Research Encyclopedia of Economics and FinanceSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207