MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6945268228 · doi:10.25318/1010012901-fra

Crédit hypothécaire à l'habitation, encours des principales catégories d'institutions prêteuses du secteur privé, Banque du Canada

2019· dataset· fr· W6945268228 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics Canada Dissemination · 2019
Typedataset
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Business Studies
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimitingContext (archaeology)PaymentTaxpayer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce tableau contient 44 séries. Les données commencent en 1969 (il n'y a pas nécessairement de données pour toutes les années pour l'ensemble des combinaisons). Ce tableau contient des données telles que décrites par les dimensions suivantes (Les combinaisons ne sont pas toutes disponibles) : Géographie (1 élément : Canada), Mensuelles (2 éléments : En fin de mois; Moyennes en fin de mois), Désaisonnalisation (2 éléments : Non désaisonnalisées; Désaisonnalisées), Composants (11 éléments : Total de l'encours du crédit de consommation; Ensemble des postes précédents; Banques à charte; Sociétés de fiducie ou de prêt hypothécaire; ...).

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Dataset
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Dataset
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics Canada DisseminationSame topicEconomic and Business StudiesFrench-language works237,207