MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6888044035 · doi:10.18712/nsd-nsd0601-1-v1

Labour Force Survey 4. quarter 1985 - 1. quarter 1987, panel

2014· dataset· en· W6888044035 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNSD – Norsk senter for forskningsdata · 2014
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)PopulationCurrent Population SurveyData collectionOfficial statisticsHealth insuranceFellState (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SSB has conducted official quarterly labor force surveys (LFS) from Q1 1972. The survey aims to provide labor authorities and others knowledge about the occupational structure of population and development over time. The surveys provide the basis and statistical material for occupational forecasting and labor market research. In the LFS respondents are interviewed two consecutive quarters, then after two more quarters they are interviewed again in two consecutive quarters. Labour Force Survey 1972 is the first complete LFS year long survey. Originally it was intended that such statistics would be a more analytical supplement to the monthly employment statistics based on the insurance fund membership files. The insurance fund-based statistics, however, fell away when health insurance was included in the National Insurance Scheme from 1 January 1971, the LFS has gradually evolved to become the main source of knowledge about the state of the labor market. General information on the Labour Force Surveys: http://www.nsd.uib.no/data/ny_individ/norStudy/aku.html Summary of AKU panels with detailed explanations for panel files: Data collection for the LFS was started somewhat experimental in 1971, but the data are first published in 1972. It may be helpful to look at the following section of the detailed view: Pool 1977|1978|1979|1980|1981|1982 |1983|1984|1985|1986|1987 | Quarter 1234 |1234|1234|1234 |1234|1234 |1234|1234|1234|1234|1234 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 52 |____|____|____|____|____|____|___X|X__X|X___|____|____|____| 599_1 = 1985,1 53 |____|____|____|____|____|____|____|XX__|XX__|____|____|____| 599_2 = 1985,2 54 |____|____|____|____|____|____|____|_XX_|_XX_|____|____|____| 599_3 = 1985,3 55 |____|____|____|____|____|____|____|__XX|__XX|____|____|____| 599_4 = 1985,4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 56 |____|____|____|____|____|____|____|___X|X__X|X___|____|____| 600_1 = 1986,1 57 |____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|XX__|XX__|____|____| 600_2 = 1986,2 58 |____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|_XX_|_XX_|____|____| 600_3 = 1986,3 59 |____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|__XX|__XX|____|____| 600_4 = 1986,4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 60 |____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|___X|X__X|X___|____| 601_1 = 1987,1 61 |____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|XX__|XX__|____| 601_2 = 1987,2 62 |____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|_XX_|_XX_|____| 601_3 = 1987,3 63 |____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|__XX|__XX|____| 601_4 = 1987,4 Panel files are created by linking four interviews from an ordinary interview round of the LFS. In the table above this means one could connect all the pools (lines) labeled X. Participation 4th time is used as the criterion for the selection process. In 1975 there was a break in the panel systematics, see 1975. The Labour Force Survey of 1976, adopted a slightly modified questionnaire and you came back to the original 6-quarterly rotation schedule which have been stable since. If one looks at a particular column, for example 1st quarter of 1984, we will see that 1/4 of the respondents are included for the fourth time, for the third time, etc. The total sums the the material for one block. Quarterly weighting allows one such block (column) to be balanced with national figures. To give proper weighted figures for a annual volume consisting of four quarters, the quarterly weights has to be divides by 4. The panels goes horizontally and each panel will have 4 weights, one for each quarter. Although they do not differ much, the weights will be prepared independently and each of them should be used for the data which the quarterly weight is made. Weighted figures apply to a pool, which means approx. 25% of the total quarterly sample, and one has to multiply by 4 to get the approximate national quarterly figures. By "Approximate national quarterly figures" it means that differences from the quarterly national weighted figures can appear, because of the selections and whitdrawal in the connection of the panels. Because of the whitdrawal inflated numbers will be lower than the national total figures. The main point of the weights is not to give national totals, but rather to ensure the best possible representation. This panel consider pool 60 in the table above.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.048

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 head0.293
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNSD – Norsk senter for forskningsdataFrench-language works237,207