MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6986910095

RESPONDING TO WIFE ABUSE IN FARM AND RURAL COMMUNITIES Searching for Solutions that Work

2001· article· en· W6986910095 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueoURspace (University of Regina) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensusRural areaWifePopulationWork (physics)FishingRural settlementAgricultureRural history
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to understand wife abuse in a rural context, it is important to recognize the nature of that context. New Brunswick is a largely rural province with 51% of its 738,133 inhabitants living in areas defined as rural. According to the 1996 Census rural means living in small towns, villages and other places with populations of less than 1,000 (Statistics Canada 1996). Only Prince Edward Island and the Northwest Territories have a higher percentage of their population living in rural areas. By comparison, 22% of Quebecois and 17% of Ontarians live in rural areas. Even provinces with considerable activity in the areas of farming, fishing and agriculture have a greater proportion of urban dwellers. For example, the rural population of Manitoba is 28%, Saskatchewan 37%, British Columbia 18% and Newfoundland 43%.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.395
Threshold uncertainty score0.738

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.244 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueoURspace (University of Regina)Same topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207