MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041092288 · doi:10.7202/057068ar

La politique québécoise de régionalisation de l'immigration: enjeux et paradoxes

2005· article· fr· W2041092288 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches sociographiques · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceCentralisationHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis la fin de la décennie 1980, la régionalisation de l'immigration est devenue une des préoccupations de l'État, celui-ci souhaitant une distribution spatiale plus équilibrée de l'immigration. À partir de l'historique de cette politique et de son évolution (1987-1996), l'auteure amorce une première analyse critique, relevant tant les objectifs sous-jacents que les notions et stratégies centrales. Elle dégage l'interrelation d'enjeux multiples, aussi bien territorial que démographique, politique et économique. Située dans le contexte de mondialisation de l'économie, de restructuration néo-libérale et de crise globale de l'État, l'analyse s'attarde aux notions de décentralisation et de partenariat, centrales dans la politique, afin de saisir le sens de ce nouveau mode de régulation étatique de l'immigration. Certaines ambiguïtés et limites sont soulignées, notamment quant au rôle de l'État dans le développement global des régions, au pouvoir des acteurs locaux et au statut des noyaux régionaux de communautés culturelles.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.281 · 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