MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W807747399 · doi:10.7202/010233ar

Recensement décennal de la population active à l’aide d’un fichier de population. Présentation d’une méthodologie

2004· article· fr· W807747399 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Gérard Bouchard, Mario Bourque, Jeannette Larouche, Lise Bergeron

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers québécois de démographie · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensusPopulationDemographyBaptismPopulation statisticsGeographyRegister (sociolinguistics)GenealogyHistoryPolitical scienceSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce texte décrit une méthodologie permettant d'utiliser le fichier de population BALSAC (pour la région du Saguenay) afin de simuler des recensements décennaux de la population active masculine à l'échelle d'une région. La méthode présentée tient compte des différents biais et lacunes reliés au sous-enregistrement des événements et à la sousdéclaration des professions dans les registres de l'état civil (dans sa plus grande partie, le fichier BALSAC est fondé sur la reconstitution automatique des familles à l'aide des actes de naissance, mariage et sépulture). La méthode comporte aussi des mécanismes d'ajustement ou de correction établis à la suite de diverses validations. Il devient ainsi possible d'étudier la structure des emplois masculins et son évolution à l'échelle régionale et subrégionale entre 1851 et 1961 en utilisant des critères et une grille de classement uniformes, ce que les recensements du gouvernement canadien ne permettent pas de faire à cause de nombreux changements méthodologiques d'une décennie à l'autre et parce que les données n'y sont pas toujours disponibles à l'échelle des comtés.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers québécois de démographieSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207