Immigrant Labour Market Performance and Skilled Immigrant Selection: The International Experience
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The immigration experience over the post-World War II period is reviewed for Canada, the United States and Australia. The immigration policies of each country are compared. The existing literature on the labour market performance of immigrant in each country is discussed and interpreted within the context of the immigration policies in place that determined the selection of immigrants of different arrival periods. In addition, studies that have compared the effectiveness of different immigrant selection systems are reviewed. Finally, a description of the history of the Quebec immigrant selection system is presented and a discussion of its possible impact on the inflow of immigrants to Quebec is discussed. Dans cet article, nous brossons un tableau de l'expérience du Canada, des États-Unis et de l'Australie en termes d'immigration depuis la fin de la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Nous comparons d'abord les politiques d'immigration de chaque pays pour ensuite porter notre attention sur la littérature consacrée à la performance économique des immigrants dans chaque pays d'accueil. Nous nous concentrons sur l'interprétation de cette littérature dans le contexte des politiques d'immigration mises en place qui visaient à encadrer la sélection des immigrants. De plus, nous effectuons une recension des articles traitant de l'efficacité relative de ces différentes politiques. Finalement, nous décrivons brièvement le système de sélection propre au Québec et ses impacts possibles sur les flux d'immigration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it