CIW - Kingston, Frontenac, Lennox & Addington Community Wellbeing Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This survey monitors wellbeing among residents of the City of Kingston, Greater Napanee, Lennox and Addington County, and Frontenac County, located in South-Eastern Ontario. The survey is a joint initiative of the Canadian Index of Wellbeing in partnership with the Community Foundation for Kingston & Area and KFL&A Public Health. The primary objectives of this survey are to (a) gather data on the wellbeing of residents which 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 dental health, emergency preparedness, and numerous socio-economic 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.008 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".