MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7128078725 · doi:10.31039/plic.2024.12.264

Consequences of AI in the workforce: How AI is taking our Jobs

2024· article· W7128078725 on OpenAlexaff
Cevdet Bayar, Jeric Panugaling, Abbas Lotf, Emin Arslan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of London International Conferences · 2024
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEthics and Social Impacts of AI
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeaning (existential)Applications of artificial intelligenceDigital economyWhite (mutation)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although artificial intelligence is helping solve many problems in today's world, it is also the reason many people around the world are losing their jobs. AI has the ability to replace or reduce many jobs now and in the future due to the rapidity of its growth. Types of jobs that could be harmed include white collar professions, unlike the blue collar careers that were reduced due to previous technological advancements. The advances in AI have mostly targeted jobs relating to digital art, content creation, and programming, meaning that these careers are most likely to see a reduction due to the growing use of AI. This article aims to review how AI has evolved throughout the years and the consequences it has on the economy as a whole. By taking a look at how AI replaces jobs, we can provide insight on how we can prepare for an increase in the use of AI.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.020
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of London International ConferencesSame topicEthics and Social Impacts of AIFrench-language works237,207