Brazilian Immigration to Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the number of Brazilians in Canada is still small, this group has increased significantly in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. This is mostly a consequence of a rise in the rate of violent crimes in Brazil and of Canada’s immigration policy, which attracts people who have a high level of education. It is also a consequence of the fact that the most popular choice for Brazilian emigrants, the United States, is becoming less attractive for a small, but growing, number of individuals. Instead, these Brazilians are finding in Canada the security, stability, and acceptance that they believe they cannot obtain in the United States. Même s’il n’y a encore que peu de Brésiliens au Canada, leur nombre a augmenté de façon marquée au tournant du 21 e siècle. Cela est surtout dû à l’accroissement de la violence au Brésil et aux politiques canadiennes d’immigration qui attirent ceux qui ont un niveau élevé d’instruction. En outre, la destination la plus populaire des émigrants brésiliens, les États-Unis, est de moins en moins séduisante pour un nombre petit, mais grandissant, de personnes pour qui le Canada offre une sécurité, une stabilité et un accueil qu’ils pensent ne pas trouver aux États-Unis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.001 |
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.
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".