Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first <i>Labour Force Survey</i> (LFS) in the United Kingdom was conducted in 1973, under the terms of a Regulation derived from the Treaty of Rome. The provision of information for the Statistical Office of the European Communities (SOEC) continued to be one of the reasons for carrying out the survey on an annual basis. SOEC co-ordinated information from labour force surveys in the member states in order to assist the EC in such matters as the allocation of the Social Fund. The survey was carried out biennially from 1973 to 1983 and was increasingly used by UK government departments to obtain information which would assist in the framing of social and economic policy. By 1983 it was being used by the Employment Department (now the Department for Work and Pensions) to obtain information which was not available from other sources or was only available for Census years. From 1984 the survey was carried out annually, and since that time the LFS has consisted of two elements:<ul><li>a quarterly survey conducted in Great Britain throughout the year, in which each sampled address was called on five times at quarterly intervals, and which yielded about 15,000 responding households in every quarter</li><li>a `boost' survey in the spring quarter (March-May), which produced interviews at over 44,000 households in Great Britain and over 4,000 households in Northern Ireland</li></ul>Users should note that only the data from the spring quarter and the 'boost' survey were included in the annual datasets for public release, and that only data from 1975-1991 are available from the UK Data Archive. The depositor recommends only considered use of data for 1975 and 1977 (SNs 1757 and 1758), as the concepts behind the definitions of economic activity changed and are not comparable with later years. Also the survey methodology was being developed at the time and so the estimates may not be reliable enough to use.<br> <br> During 1991 the survey was developed, so that from spring 1992 the data were made available quarterly, with a quarterly sample size approximately equivalent to that of the previous annual data. The <i>Quarterly Labour Force Survey</i> series therefore superseded the annual LFS series, and is held at the Data Archive under GN 33246.<br> <br> For the third edition of the study, the depositor supplied a re-weighted version of the data file. The re-weighting has been done to bring LFS data in line with the population estimates from the 2001 Census.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.059 |
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".