MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385838996 · doi:10.1080/00087041.2023.2173841

Digitizing Early Postwar Canadian Census Tract Maps: Sources, Methods and Challenges

2023· article· en· W4385838996 on OpenAlex

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

VenueThe Cartographic Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensusCensus tractGeoreferenceGeographyCartographyCadastreDominionPopulationNeighbourhood (mathematics)Geospatial analysisBoundary (topology)Regional scienceLibrary scienceComputer sciencePhysical geographyDemographyArchaeologySociologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At present, Canadian census tract boundaries are available in digital form for 1951 and at 5-year intervals for the 1976–2021 period; the 1956–66 census boundary files have not been digitized and associated data are not readily available for the pre-1971 period. This inhibits the mapping and analysis of neighbourhood change for a period of rapid urban and social transformation. To fill this gap, we digitized 1956–66 census tract boundaries from paper maps for all cities for which such data were disseminated. We adjusted 2006 boundaries to match georeferenced historical maps in concert with ancillary data, including topographic and cadastral maps. All decisions are documented in the files. Finally, printed profile tables for 1951 and 1956 were digitized for joining the boundary files. Researchers may use these datasets to explore, analyse and map geospatial trends in the Canadian population at the neighbourhood scale back to 1951.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.169 · 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