MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140625734 · doi:10.7202/043019ar

Equality Rights in the Federal Independant Immigrant Selection Criteria

2005· article· en· W2140625734 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Walter Chi Yan Tom

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscrimination and Equality Law
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterImmigrationSupreme courtConformityPolitical scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)LawInterpretation (philosophy)Law and economicsSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The potential impact of fundamental guarantees in favour of equality on the Canadian immigration system is significant. Although immigration law is inherently unequal, the role of equality rights is still of primary importance in distinctions based on the enumerated and analogous grounds of s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The objective of this paper is to examine the federal independent immigrant selection criteria and to assess its conformity to the standards of s. 15 of the Charter, according to recent judicial interpretation by the Supreme Court of Canada.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicDiscrimination and Equality LawFrench-language works237,207