MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388665963 · doi:10.54056/yuxg2785

Employment and Wages in 2017: A Good Year for Aboriginals and Non-Aboriginals in Canada

2018· article· en· W4388665963 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert Oppenheimer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aboriginal Economic Development · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsDawson College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnemploymentWageUnemployment rateDemographic economicsLabour economicsEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Employment, unemployment and wage rates improved for Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals in Canada in 2017. Participation rates remained the same for Aboriginals and slightly increased for non-Aboriginals. All four of these rates, employment, unemployment, participation and wages, are currently and historically more favourable for non-Aboriginals than for Aboriginals. However, when examined by the educational level completed, wage and employment rates are similar. Measures of employment are examined by gender, age, province, economic sector, and education, and for Métis, First Nations and Inuit.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aboriginal Economic DevelopmentSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207