MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149036142 · doi:10.7202/1005797ar

La place de la victime dans la lutte contre la traite des personnes au Canada

2011· article· fr· W2149036142 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Estíbaliz Jiménez

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminologie · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’immigration irrégulière en général, et à plus forte raison lorsqu’elle implique l’exploitation des êtres humains, comme c’est le cas de la traite des personnes, est une source importante d’inquiétude pour un grand nombre de pays, dont le Canada. En 2002, le Canada a ratifié le Protocole additionnel à la Convention des Nations Unies contre la criminalité transnationale organisée visant à prévenir, réprimer et punir la traite des personnes, en particulier des femmes et des enfants. La majorité des mesures adoptées par le Canada dans la lutte contre la traite visent particulièrement le contrôle migratoire et la criminalisation du trafiquant, reléguant la protection et l’assistance aux victimes de la traite au second plan. De plus, plusieurs de ces mesures peuvent victimiser et même criminaliser les victimes. Le Permis de séjour temporaire (PST) mis en place par le Canada pour les victimes de la traite semble, d’un point de vue victimologique, un pas dans la bonne direction. Toutefois, en pratique, cette mesure s’avère très peu efficace pour rejoindre les victimes. Cet article présente, d’un point de vue juridique et victimologique, les progrès, mais également les lacunes de la législation et de la politique canadienne en matière de protection et d’assistance aux victimes de la traite.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0190.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.115
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminologieSame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207