MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966731374 · doi:10.1353/ces.2014.0011

Power, Immigration and the “Prescribed Amount” Rule: The Canadian Government and the Syrians in the Early Twentieth Century

2014· article· fr· W1966731374 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Brian Aboud

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian ethnic studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiaspora, migration, transnational identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationAgency (philosophy)State (computer science)Power (physics)Government (linguistics)PoliticsPolitical scienceSociologyLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Un règlement gouvernemental prescrivant que les immigrants «asiatiques» aient avec eux un montant minimum d’argent pour entrer au Canada, est fut intégré à un assemblage d’instruments et de procédures établis par l’État canadien au début du vingtième siècle pour limiter l’immigration en provenance d’Asie. Parmi ces «Asiatiques», les Syriens furent particulièrement affectés par ce règlement. En 1911-1912, ils ont contesté cette mesure de contrôle. Ce fut un tournant important pour l’action politique du groupe syrien et en termes de sa relation de pouvoir avec l’État. Cette action d’opposition était pourtant sérieusement limitée. Elle s’objectait au mode d’exécution de la règlementation du «montant prescrit», ainsi que de ses présuppositions sur les Syriens. Elle a cependant aussi manifesté son alignement avec la façon générale de penser concernant les populations, les «races» et les immigrants «souhaitables» qui donnaient une base justificatrice aux pratiques du pouvoir d’État. Cet article examine cet épisode de tension et de contention dans les rapports entre l’État et les Syriens dans le cas canadien, dans le but d’y approfondir la compréhension des relations de pouvoir dans le domaine de l’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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.882

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0230.030
Scholarly communication0.0070.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian ethnic studiesSame topicDiaspora, migration, transnational identityFrench-language works237,207