Survey of Earned Doctorates, 2003-2008 [Canada] [Excel]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>The Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED) is an annual census of doctorate recipients in Canada that was conducted for the first time on a national basis during the 2003-2004 academic year. The basic purpose of this survey is to gather data about all doctoral graduates in Canada to inform government, associations, universities and other stakeholders on the characteristics and plans of these very highly qualified graduates as they leave their doctoral programs.</p> <p>The survey's key data objectives are to evaluate the impact of the various sources of institutional funding; to gather information on the retention of doctoral students in Canada; to gain a better understanding of postgraduate education financing and debt level; to allow labour market planners to assess the additions to the domestic stock of highly qualified human resources in various fields; and, to allow an examination of the path to receipt of doctoral degrees and the impact of foreign students. </p> <p>The survey collects data about the graduate's postsecondary academic path, funding sources, field of study and his/her immediate postgraduate plans.</p> <p>The data from the SED can be used by universities and governments to make policy decisions that affect graduate education throughout Canada, by federal agencies to inform parliament and to make decisions about financial commitments that affect graduate education throughout Canada; and, in the evaluation of graduate education programs, strategic planning at the provincial level, labour force projections, and affirmative action plans at all levels. </p>
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".