MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6990748905

Educational Attainment and Skill Utilisation in the Irish Labour Market: An EU Comparison. Quarterly Economic Commentary Special Article, WINTER 2017

2017· other· en· W6990748905 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchive of European Integration (AEI) (University of Pittsburgh) · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStrong
KeywordsIrishUnemploymentQuarter (Canadian coin)ImmigrationEducational attainmentUnemployment rate
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years the Irish economy has experienced strong economic growth accompanied by significant improvements in the labour market. The unemployment rate in the second quarter of 2017 stands at 6.2 per cent (CSO, 2017), its lowest rate in nine years. In light of these improvements in the labour market, we examine the nature of current employment in Ireland with respect to the intensity of use of certain skills and the mismatch between the skills possessed by employees and those required to do their jobs. Furthermore, we consider the possible future sources of skilled labour supply by examining the characteristics of those currently unemployed and inactive in the labour market, as well as the ability of Ireland to attract high-skilled migrant workers. Our analysis reveals a high degree of skill underutilisation among Irish employees. The percentage of Irish workers reporting education or skill levels in excess of those required to do their job is the third highest of 28 EU countries. Our findings also indicate that, as was the case in recent decades, immigration may play an important role as a source of skilled labour in a tightening labour market.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchive of European Integration (AEI) (University of Pittsburgh)French-language works237,207