MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402405797 · doi:10.23889/ijpds.v9i5.2715

Using linked data to inform multidimensional real-world issues: Canadian examples

2024· article· en· W4402405797 on OpenAlexaffabout
Winnie Chan, Xue Li

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Population Data Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceData science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Issues at the top of global and national policy agendas, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, climate emergency, and energy and cost of living crises, are illustrating the interconnectivity of the economy, society, and the environment. Moreover, it is clear, that impacts of these issues are not uniformly felt across societies. Greater granularity of information is required to address inequalities. As a result, policy makers are taking a more holistic view of issues to address the interlinkages across domains. This is driving the demand for Statistics Canada to provide statistical insights that address these cross-cutting policy issues and provide more granular information across multiple domains. Linked data are necessary for understanding the interrelated nature of these issues and the scope of their impact. For example, recent Canadian research based on linked data has shown that COVID-19 led to changes in work arrangements that have implications for public transit use and greenhouse gas emissions. The employer-employee linked administrative data augmented with a further linkage to census data provide opportunities for Canadian researchers to produce multidimensional insights on a portrait of racialized groups and immigrants including refugees’ presence in the Canadian economy, their sociodemographic characteristics, and their performance over time relative to other Canadians, particularly post the COVID pandemic. Rapid growth in data availability for research also poses new challenges ranging from technical issues needed for the feasibility of data linkage to stewardship issues related to governance, access, and oversight. The presentation will also discuss the lessons learned and reflections from the Canadian experiences.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.008
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.333
GPT teacher head0.502
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Population Data ScienceSame topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207