MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028530889 · doi:10.7202/1015296ar

La criminalisation du trafic de migrants au Canada

2013· article· fr· W2028530889 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Estíbaliz Jiménez

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminologie · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Criminal Justice and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsInternational Centre for Comparative CriminologyÉcole Nationale d'Administration PubliqueUniversité de MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceImmigrationHumanitiesArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La migration irrégulière est perçue par la communauté internationale comme un enjeu sécuritaire. La criminalisation de l’immigration devient alors un outil de contrôle migratoire et de sécurisation des frontières. Au cours des dernières années, le Canada a adopté une approche punitive et un recours plus important à la criminalisation de l’immigration irrégulière, avec des peines pouvant atteindre l’emprisonnement à vie. Paradoxalement, malgré un renforcement normatif, dont l’adoption de peines minimales obligatoires et l’augmentation des peines maximales, les tribunaux canadiens imposent aux passeurs des peines d’emprisonnement de courte durée et généralement des peines d’emprisonnement avec sursis à purger dans la collectivité. Le présent article présente les résultats des analyses législatives et jurisprudentielles relatives au trafic de migrants au Canada. Les résultats démontrent que les peines octroyées par les tribunaux ne sont pas proportionnelles aux discours politiques et médiatiques alarmistes à l’égard de la menace que représente l’organisation de l’entrée illégale.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0110.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.247
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.095 · 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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminologieSame topicEuropean Criminal Justice and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207