MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1771936621 · doi:10.25071/1920-7336.21263

Living up to America’s Values: Reforming the U.S. Detention System for Asylum Seekers

2002· article· en· W1771936621 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eleanor Acer

Bibliographic record

VenueRefuge Canada s Journal on Refuge · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Criminal Justice and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuard (computer science)RefugeeImmigration detentionLawPolitical scienceLaw and economicsCriminologySociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The U.S. detention system for asylum seekers is fundamentally flawed. These flaws reflect an underlying lack of fairness that is inconsistent with international law and with U.S. traditions of fairness. For instance, the initial determination to detain an asylum seeker is not the result of an individualized determination, but is instead mandatory. Subsequent parole decisions are entrusted to the INS, which is the detaining authority, rather than to an independent authority. In short, the system lacks the kinds of safeguards necessary to promote due process and to guard against unfair and arbitrary detention. Reform is possible. The detention system for asylum seekers can be improved so that it is consistent with the values of fairness that the United States strives to meet.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0090.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRefuge Canada s Journal on RefugeSame topicEuropean Criminal Justice and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207