MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

State of Imagination: Embodiments of Immigration Canada

2010· article· en· W2137255811 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Irina Culic

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Sociological Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiminalityGovernmentalityImmigrationReflexivitySociologyState (computer science)MobilitiesPoliticsDisciplinePower (physics)InvisibilityCommunismPolitical economyGender studiesLawPolitical scienceSocial scienceAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates Romanians' immigration to Canada after the fall of the communist regime, focusing on the case of applicants under the ‘skilled workers and professionals’ category. The empirical study of Canadian immigration policy constitutes the ground for a critical analysis of the nature of the state and modalities of state power. Selecting candidates for immigration involves a refined politics of making subjects, whereby the state is ‘effected’ through disciplinary inscriptions on migrants and projects of the self, materialized in extraterritorial social spaces, and objectified in a form of governmentality over ‘external populations’. It also opens a space to explore the workings of the self in a globalized world. Rights to international mobility may generate not only hybrid sorts of legal subjects incompletely and imprecisely tied to two states, but also highly reflexive individuals, performatively enacting themselves as subjects of policies, discourses, and knowledges from positions of ontological and emotional liminality.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0170.042
Scholarly communication0.0130.003
Open science0.0010.006
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations16
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Sociological ReviewSame topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207