Measuring gambling and problem gambling in Alberta using the Canadian problem gambling index (CPGI) : final report
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is funded by a research grant provided by the Alberta Gaming Research Institute and is the third study in eight years to survey adult Albertans gambling patterns and behaviours (Wynne, Smith, & Volberg, 1994; Wynne Resources, 1998). The focus of this research project is twofold; that is, to use the newly-minted CPGI to describe the gambling practices of adult Albertans and to gain insight into the extent of problem gambling behaviour in this population. The results are intended to serve as a baseline measure for future Alberta problem gambling prevalence research, and ultimately, it is envisaged that these comparable studies will feed into a database that profiles gambling and problem gambling behavior across Canada. The remainder of this chapter includes a brief update of changes to the Alberta legal gambling landscape since the 1998 study; it proceeds with a discussion of problem gambling as a public health issue, and concludes with an elaboration of the Measuring Problem Gambling in Canada project, which generated the CPGI.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it