MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1491902360 · doi:10.25071/1920-7336.39619

Gendered Perspectives on Refugee Determination in Canada

2014· article· en· W1491902360 on OpenAlex
Tanya Aberman

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueRefuge Canada s Journal on Refuge · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeIntersectionalitySubjectivityGender studiesAffect (linguistics)Context (archaeology)NormativeSociologyPerspective (graphical)Political scienceLawEpistemologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses refugee determination from an intersectional perspective to unpack the impacts of gender on the refugee determination hearing in Canada. The article highlights the importance of dominant discourses in a legal context, focusing particularly on how discursive constructions of subjectivity affect refugee determination where claimants’ trustworthiness depends not only upon their abilities to describe their past experiences, but also how well their story corresponds with dominant discourses about refugees. It also discusses how these dominant discourses are racialized, gendered, and hetero-normative, and how feminist theories of intersectionality could be of use to deconstruct the ways they affect different groups of refugee claimants. The article concludes by considering the implications of the newly shortened timelines in refugee adjudication.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.251 · 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