Increasing the employability of young persons : is the Portuguese Professional Traineeship Programme transferable to Malta?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the past year, as in other EU countries, the Maltese economy slowed down as an effect of the global economic situation. According to preliminary estimates for the second quarter of 2009, the GDP contracted by 3.3 % on annual basis1. Lower tourist arrivals together with a downturn in exports are major causes of the decline in the economic activity. The manufacturing enterprises in the automotive sector were affected the most. However, rather than dismissing employees, several companies adopted a wait-and-see strategy, reducing the working week in agreement with trade unions. Indeed, the employment in the manufacturing sector increased by 7.5 % between the second quarters of 2008 and 2009. Similarly, the number of workers in the tourism industry increased marginally over the same period (by 1.9 %)2. However, recent data on tourist departures indicates that inbound tourists in August 2009 have dropped by 3.5 % compared to the corresponding month in 2008. This was accompanied by a 5.5 % decrease in the total nights spent in Malta over the same period3. Such figures can lead to a decrease in employment in the tourism sector when figures for the summer 2009 are published. \nDespite the global recession, overall, the Labour Force Survey (LFS) for Q2 2009 indicates that employment in Malta increased by 0.8 % when compared to the same quarter of the previous year (NSO, 2009b). This translated to a marginal decrease in the employment rate of 0.5 percentage points (from 55.4 % to 54.9 %). Construction, financial intermediation, education, and health and social work were among the sectors that registered a decrease in the number of workers. Considering the difficult period, the unemployment rate increased only marginally by 1 percentage points between Q2 2008 and Q2 2009 (from 6 % to 7 %). This turned to an additional 1 848 unemployed. [Excerpt]
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".