Bibliographic record
Abstract
P arents in Canada and the United States are acutely aware of the continuing difficulties of balancing work and family life, as well as the lack of governmental or employer support for child care and other family programs.Their governments' abysmal records become even starker when the programs and ser vices for parents and children are held up to those available in other countries.Current initiatives at the federal, state/provincial, and local government levels thus must be placed in the context of what other countries already provide in terms of child care and family policies. EUROPEAN EXAMPLESChild care coverage in Sweden is nearly universal.Families with very young children are additionally given assistance in balancing work and family responsibilities.Parents are entitled to approximately 15 months' total parental leave, which can be taken until the child is 8 years old, with high wage replacement rates (80-85 percent) for most of the parental leave period.Similarly in France, government support for children is very generous.Numerous policies for families exist, including family allowances, young children's allowances, school allowances, tax benefits for families with dependent children, an extensive system of child care supported by state revenues, allowances for the hiring of independent childminders, extensive maternity and parental leave programs, and preschool programs for all children from the age of three.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".