MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6974206330 · doi:10.5878/000048

Swedish opinion 1983

2013· dataset· en· W6974206330 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSwedish National Data Service · 2013
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Government (linguistics)Public opinionPoliticsOpinion pollCitizenship

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset contains information from the fifth survey of the collection of Swedish opinion surveys. The 1983 survey was carried out in a somewhat different way than the previous surveys. Three questionnaires were used, each containing approximately 275 questions. 104 questions were put in all three questionnaires, and in all there were 538 different questions. Each questionnaire was answered by approximately 900 persons. The questionnaires were compiled with regard to the debate occurring in media during the last quarter of 1982 and the first of 1983. Many of the questions are replications of questions asked in previous surveys, some of the questions are excluded and a number of questions are added. New questions dealt with: reasons for not wanting more children; own and parents country of origin, citizenship and thoughts of emigration; right to vote for immigrants, and Swedes living abroad; adoption; moral, ability and behaviour within a number of occupational groups; groups favoured/unfavoured in the wage negotiations; issues important for the unity within the bourgeoise parties; opinion on how the government succeeded in carrying out their electoral promises and how they are dealing with other problems; opinion on a number of political goals; reasons why social democrats and the bourgeoise parties can´t cooperate; conception of justice; tobacco, alcohol and drugs.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0100.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.194

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.234 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSwedish National Data ServiceFrench-language works237,207