MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407636065 · doi:10.1111/caje.70000

Revisiting Quebec's Quiet Revolution: A synthetic control analysis

2025· article· en· W4407636065 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Vincent Geloso, Chandler S. Reilly

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQUIETHistoryPhysicsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The year 1960 is often presented as a break year in the economic history of Quebec and Canada. It is used to mark the beginning of the “Quiet Revolution” during which Canada's French‐speaking province of Quebec underwent rapid socio‐economic change in the form of rapid economic convergence with the rest of Canada and the emergence of a more expansive state (more so than in the rest of Canada). Using synthetic control methods, we analyze whether 1960 is associated with a departure from previous developments. With regards to GDP per capita, GDP per worker, household‐size adjusted income, real wages and enrolment rates in primary and secondary schools, we find that 1960 was not an important date. For all macroeconomic indicators and enrolment rates, the counterfactual scenarios do not significantly differ from the actual data. For life expectancy at birth and completed schooling outcomes by schooling cohorts, we find that 1960 did mark a significant departure—albeit a modest one. We also find signs that size of government changed markedly after 1960. Shifting to other methods such as panel approach or time series strategy do not alter these results.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.144 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→