Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors argue that states were historically less bordered and self-contained than public opinion and the scholarship oriented around the nation-state have assumed. First, the authors address the permeability of borders in the period of mass migration at the turn to the 20th century, taking as examples migrants to Canada from Europe, China, and elsewhere. Second, they discuss the period of the 1880s to 1940s, during which the emergence of the working classes in the Atlantic world and “pauperism” prompted the emergence of transatlantic social thought. By mid-twentieth century, social citizenship arose as a corollary to political citizenship. Third, they discern a new stage of political interaction from the founding of the United Nations to the turn of the 21st century, in which democracies have become highly sensitive to developments beyond their borders and have become linked into a comprehensive multilateral system of organizations and legal rules. While noting that Canada’s record in protecting the rights of non-citizens within its borders earns it deserved praise, the authors argue that Canada simultaneously expends great effort on policing and preventing initial border crossings by those claiming human rights protection. While Canada has a relatively strong culture of rights protection and a famously weak conception of national identity, it also has an underestimated system of border control. The authors finally describe three liminal figures whose experiences illustrate the paradoxical interactions between rights and borders in Canada: the citizen abroad, the foreigner within, and the would-be asylum seeker.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.023 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.003 |
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".