Editorial: Refugees and Forced Migration: Hardening of the Arteries in the Global Reign of Insecurity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most of the articles in this issue of Transcultural Psychiatry stem from the 6th annual McGill Advanced Study Institute in Cultural Psychiatry on 'Refugees and forced migration: Human rights and mental health services,' which took place in Montreal, June 1-2, 2006. The conference and workshop brought together an international group of scholars from anthropology, sociology, law, public health, psychiatry and psychology to examine the mental health of asylum seekers, refugees and internally displaced peoples, as well as the impact of human trafficking. Recent years have seen profound changes in the situation of refugees. While the number of people enduring violence and displacement continues to increase, receiving countries have become less welcoming. Anxieties about security and social integration have been used to justify more restrictive migration policies and the harsh treatment of people seeking asylum (Fekete, 2005). In many places, this has resulted in a decrease in the numbers of people applying for refugee status and in people seeking asylum within countries of safe haven. The decrease in numbers could be taken as an indication of less need but, in fact, it largely reflects the impact of policies of deterrence and exclusion. Language: en
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.011 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".