MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1868880542 · doi:10.3402/egp.v8.25975

Exit and the duty to admit

2015· article· en· W1868880542 on OpenAlexaff
Patti Tamara Lenard

Bibliographic record

VenueEthics & Global Politics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Philosophy and Ethics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDutyInjusticeState (computer science)PoliticsConventionLaw and economicsPolitical scienceLawFocus (optics)SociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventionally, it is presumed that while citizens have the right to exit the state in which they are located, no particular state (except a citizen's home state) is required to admit them. Yet, this convention has produced, and continues to produce, injustice; to understand why, I focus on defining and protecting a right to exit, as distinct from the right to move in general. This analysis leads me to propose that whereas the political theoretic literature appears to have converged on a commitment to decisive asymmetry (in favor of accepting a state's right to exclude), I propose that only a weak asymmetry is justified. I argue that receiving states are duty-bound to act in ways that enable migrants to exercise their right to exit. In particular, I argue that receiving states have a perfect duty to collectivize the process by which needy migrants can exercise the right to exit.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthics & Global PoliticsSame topicPolitical Philosophy and EthicsFrench-language works237,207