Youth presence in Canadian co-operatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Young people have been integrated into the Canadian co-operative movement throughout its history, through various programs, and to varying degrees. However the current succession challenges that face co-operatives and all types of business, increases the need for identifying and developing ways to integrate young Canadians into co-operatives, and to begin now. The objective of this project was to develop a community-based co-operative with a youth membership to deliver educational services about co-operatives to their peer groups. It was quickly realized that a more macro-level approach needed to be taken to create an environment for the involvement of young people. The involvement of young Canadian's in co-operatives was analyzed through three areas: education, employment and empowerment, all supported by research and youth input as being the most relevant areas for integration. Canadian co-operatives face additional obstacles for youth integration because the co-operative sector is not widely understood or promoted amongst much of the general public, therefore, this project also examines the role that can be played by the Canadian Co-operative Association, and the collaboration and ownership that must be take by all co-ops in Canada to ensure that values and contributions of co-operatives are not lost to Canadian communities. (Author abstract)
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".