MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182095176

Integration Policy Towards Immigrants: Current Experience

2012· article· en· W2182095176 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nadiia Bureiko

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUkrainian Cultural and Linguistic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationMulticulturalismImmigration policyPoliticsPolitical scienceState (computer science)Assimilation (phonology)Cultural assimilationDevelopment economicsEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the contemporary world the intensity of the immigration movements is constantly increasing. Countries which experience great immigrant flows are facing numerous problems which should be solved. The article studies the current immigration flows in EU countries, the United States of America and Canada and presents three main models of integration policy towards immigrants – political assimilation, functional integration and multicultural model. Separate models are distinguished for the Muslims’ integration. The author examines the peculiarities of every model and examines the conclusions provided by the Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX) concerning the situation of the immigrants’ integration in 31 countries in 2011. Among all the policy indicators the first that are defined are as follows: political participation, education, labour market mobility and anti-discrimination. The situation with immigrants’ integration in Ukraine is also studied as it is gaining a great attention of the authorities and the public. The measures and practical steps done regarding this situation in Ukraine in recent years are analyzed using the information offered by the State Migration Service of Ukraine.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.345
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)Same topicUkrainian Cultural and Linguistic StudiesFrench-language works237,207