MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6889051965 · doi:10.25318/3310020501-fra

Importance des raisons justifiant la relocalisation des activités de services de technologies de l’information et des communications (TIC) au Canada, selon l'industrie et la taille de l’entreprise

2019· dataset· fr· W6889051965 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics Canada Dissemination · 2019
Typedataset
Languagefr
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimitingLegislationLiberian dollar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pourcentage d’entreprises pour lesquelles certaines raisons de la relocalisation des activités de services de technologies de l’information et des communications (TIC) au Canada n’étaient pas importantes du tout ou étaient peu importantes, importantes, très importantes ou sans objet, selon le code du Système de classification des industries de l’Amérique du Nord (SCIAN) et la taille de l’entreprise, sur une période d’observation de trois ans. Les raisons de la relocalisation de ces activités au Canada peuvent comprendre les suivantes : non-réalisation des économies de coûts (diminution des coûts d’exploitation) découlant de la délocalisation des activités à l’étranger, augmentation des coûts de la main-d’œuvre à l’étranger (diminution des coûts de la main-d’œuvre au Canada), qualité supérieure de la main-d’œuvre ou des ressources au Canada, affaiblissement du dollar canadien, regroupement de plusieurs fournisseurs, incitatifs fiscaux ou autres incitatifs financiers, préoccupations relatives à la propriété intellectuelle, proximité des clients ou autres questions de logistique et autres motifs relatifs aux services de technologies de l’information et des communications (TIC).

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)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics Canada DisseminationSame topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207