MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6931878557 · doi:10.5683/sp3/a6jlxd

CIW - Victoria Capital Region Community Wellbeing Survey

2015· dataset· en· W6931878557 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueBorealis · 2015
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipShoreSurvey data collectionPeninsulaCapital (architecture)Index (typography)ResidenceQuestionnaire

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This survey monitors wellbeing among residents of the Victoria Capital Region, located in British Columbia. The Capital Regional District is an administrative district that encompasses the southern Gulf Islands and the southern tip of Vancouver Island. The survey is a joint initiative of the Canadian Index of Wellbeing in partnership with Victoria Community Foundation and the Capital Regional District. These data represent the Community Wellbeing Survey of the Victoria Capital Region (N=2,236), which includes four core geographic areas: Core (Esquimalt, Oak Bay, Saanich, Victoria, View Royal), Peninsula (Central Saanich, North Saanich, Sidney), West Shore (Colwood, Highlands, Langford, Metochosin, Sooke), and the Gulf Islands (Salt Spring Island, Southern Gulf Island). The primary objectives of this survey are to (a) gather data on the wellbeing of residents that could be monitored over time; and, (b) to provide information on specific aspects of wellbeing that could be used to inform policy issues and community action. The purpose of the survey is to better understand subjective perceptions of wellbeing of residents in the survey area. The survey provides information based on eight domains of wellbeing, as identified by the Canadian Index of Wellbeing: Community Vitality, Democratic Engagement, Environment, Education, Healthy Populations, Leisure and Culture, Living Standards, and Time Use. The questionnaire collected additional information about numerous socio-economic and household characteristics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.007

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.307 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBorealisSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207