Labour Force Survey 2nd quarter 2014 - 1st quarter 2016, panel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Labour Force Survey 2nd quarter 2014 - 1st quarter 2016, panel (8 quarters) As of the 1st quarter of 1972, SSB has conducted official quarterly labour force surveys (AKU). These surveys aim to give the labour force authorities (and other people interested) knowledge of the occupational structure of the population and how it develops over time. The surveys are meant to give a foundation and statistical material for occupational prognoses and labour research. In 1996, AKU was significantly revised: The questionnaire, the file description and the standard for coding of industry and occupation. The data collection also changed to CATI - Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing. A new classification of industry was put into use (NOS C 182, based on the EU standard NACE, Rev.1). This standard was updated in 2002 and 2007. Also, the new Norwegian standard classification of occupations (STYRK) based on ISCO 88 was used from 1996 and onwards. The variable indicating socio-economic status was omitted, as a similar variable was not developed in the new occupational classification. Every second quarter AKU is extended with a number of questions to collect data accordant to Eurostats / EUs spesifications. From 1996, the rotation schedule changed, each family now attends eight consecutive quarters. As of 1996 the selection shedule was changed as well with stratification at the county level. Summary of AKU panels with detailed explanations for panel files: Data collection for the new rotation plan as the basis for this file is shown below. Participants in the 4th quarter of 1997 is the first batch of 8 possible completed interviews. Pool |2009 |2010|2011|2012|2013|2014|2015|2016| Quarter |1234|1234 |1234|1234 |1234|1234|1234|1234| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |____|____|____|__XX|XXXX|XX__|____|____| 2014,2 |____|____|____|___X|XXXX|XXX_|____|____| 2014,3 |____|____|____|____|XXXX|XXXX|____|____| 2014,4 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |____|____|____|____|_XXX|XXXX|X___|____| 2015,1 |____|____|____|____|__XX|XXXX|XX__|____| 2015,2 |____|____|____|____|___X|XXXX|XXX_|____| 2015,3 |____|____|____|____|____|XXXX|XXXX|____| 2015,4 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |____|____|____|____|____|_XXX|XXXX|X___| 2016,1 Panel files are created by linking eight interviews from an ordinary interview round of the Labour Force Survey. In the table above means that one could connect all the batches (lines) marked X. Participation 8 times used as a criterion for selection. Annual files and quarterly files consist of respondents who are participating for 1st time, 2nd time, and so on. The weights allow such cross-sections (columns) can be balanced with national figures. If 4 quarters is merged into an annual volume, the quarterly weights be divided by four to attain correct weighted annual numbers. Each panel (panel files: horisontal in the table) will have a weight compiled for each quarter. Although the weights do not differ much from each other, they will be compiled independently, and each weight should be used only for the data which the quarterly weight is made for. Weighted numbers is valid for one pool, which means ca 12,5 % (1/8) of a total quarterly selection. Therefore, one must multiply by 8 to 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 is not to give national totals, but rather to ensure the best possible representation.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".