Fiche infographique : les couples modernes au Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Si les familles évoluent au fil des générations, c’est aussi le cas des relations de couple, qui représentent un volet central du « paysage familial » au Canada. Ces changements perpétuels sont tributaires de certaines forces socioéconomiques, culturelles et contextuelles en évolution, qui façonnent la vie de famille et vice-versa. Fréquentations, mariages, cohabitation, unions de fait : il y a autant de façons de s’unir (ou de se désunir) qu’il y a de couples… Néanmoins, certaines tendances se dessinent au pays à l’heure où les structures familiales se diversifient, où les couples se forment de plus en plus tardivement dans la vie, et où le budget familial repose sur une base plus égalitaire. En fonction des nouvelles données du Recensement de 2016, l’Institut Vanier de la famille a produit une fiche infographique illustrant la situation des couples modernes au Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".