MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7042597469

Poverty in Canada: An Exploratory Spatial Data Analysis

2011· other· en· W7042597469 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2011
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyExploratory data analysisExploratory analysisPopulationSpatial analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A spatial understanding of poverty is crucial in developing appropriate anti-poverty strategies, which should vary across space in light of Canada‟s diverse social geography. By employing exploratory spatial data analysis techniques, including global and local cluster analyses, and inferential spatial regression, this study examines the spatial nature and determinants of poverty across census divisions for the years 1991, 1996, 2001 and 2006. Throughout the 1990s, Canadian poverty was defined by an east-west cleavage, with high poverty in the east and low poverty rates in the west. By 2006 this cleavage was replaced by an emergent urban-rural divide, indicating a new and troubling concentration of poverty in Canada's cities. Poverty rates in both urban and rural Canada are particularly driven by such variables as median household income, female-headed lone-parent families, and, in cities, large immigrant populations. These results point to the importance of defining both people- and place-based antipoverty policies, as well as an increasingly worrisome situation for Canada's urban poor.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.021
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.149 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicSpatial and Panel Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207