MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381887265 · doi:10.1111/cag.12859

The Index of Economic Disparity: Measuring trends in economic disparity across Canadian Census Subdivisions and rural and urban communities

2023· article· en· W4381887265 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
David Weaver, Tamara Krawchenko, Sean Markey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Aging, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of VictoriaMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCensusIndex (typography)GeographyInequalitySubdivisionPopulationIndex of dissimilarityDiversity (politics)PercentileDemographic economicsSocioeconomicsEconomic growthEconomicsDemographyPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Territorial inequalities have long been a subject of study and concern in Canada. In the face of large structural changes such as industrial shifts and the decarbonization of our economies, there is an urgency to understand such inequalities and design effective policy interventions for those places facing persistent economic decline. This paper shares a novel composite index that measures economic disparity across Canadian Census Subdivisions (CSDs) using Census data from 2001 through 2016 and the 2011 National Household Survey. Named the “Index of Economic Disparity,” it is comprised of an equally weighted average of four sub‐indices that assign percentile rankings for all CSDs based on whether they experience persistent and substantial decline in key economic areas: population, labour force outcomes, working‐age share of population, and industrial diversity. The variation of outcomes across geographies—urban and rural—highlights the importance of place‐based policies .

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.228 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennesSame topicMigration, Aging, and Tourism StudiesFrench-language works237,207