MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392824135 · doi:10.29173/jaed325

Aboriginal Employment: Continuing to Improve in 2012

2013· article· en· W4392824135 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert Oppenheimer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aboriginal Economic Development · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationGeographyDemographic economicsDemographySocioeconomicsPolitical scienceSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The employment rate for Aboriginals living off-reserve in Canada continued to improve in 2012. It increased to 56.9%, a rate of two percent (2%) over 2011. This is impressive when compared to the zero growth rate for non-Aboriginals. The participation rate for Aboriginals living off-reserve in Canada also increased. It grew from 64.1% to 65.2%. In addition, the gap between Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals for employment rates and participation rates continued to narrow in 2012. When employment is examined by educational level, there is no meaningful difference between Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals. There is also a clear relationship that increased levels of education are associated with higher employment rates and participation rates. Aboriginal employment in 2012 increased the most in Ontario. It is also the province with the largest Aboriginal as well as non-Aboriginal populations. The sectors in which the largest increases in Aboriginal employment in 2012 occurred were in construction, manufacturing, health care and social assistance and information, culture and recreation.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.282 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aboriginal Economic DevelopmentSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207