MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407303398 · doi:10.3138/cpp.2024-023

Labour Market Landscape for Economics Graduates in Canada

2025· article· fr· W4407303398 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Mojgan Samandar Ali Eshtehardi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovations in Educational Methods
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsAgricultural economicsEconomic geographyNatural resource economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude examine les demandes et les compétences requises sur le marché du travail canadien pour les diplômés en économie, en utilisant des techniques de scraping Web et de traitement du langage naturel (TLN). Les principaux pôles régionaux identifiés sont l'Ontario (Toronto), le Québec (Montréal) et l'Alberta (Calgary). La suite Microsoft Office, en particulier Microsoft Excel, est l'exigence logicielle la plus répandue. Au-delà des logiciels, les diplômés en économie doivent posséder un large éventail de compétences techniques, notamment la gestion des données, la modélisation avancée, la programmation (Python, SQL) et la présentation/documentation (PowerPoint, rédaction de rapports). Les compétences générales telles que la communication, le travail d’équipe et les compétences analytiques sont également très recherchées, soulignant l'importance de la collaboration et de la résolution de problèmes sur le terrain. Ces résultats soulignent la nécessité pour les diplômés en économie d'adapter le développement de leurs compétences aux besoins régionaux. Dans l'ensemble, cette étude fournit des informations exploitables aux parties prenantes, y compris les éducateurs et les décideurs politiques, pour aligner les programmes éducatifs et les stratégies de développement de la main-d’œuvre sur l’évolution des demandes du marché du travail canadien.

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 score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.002

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public PolicySame topicInnovations in Educational MethodsFrench-language works237,207