Evidence that Evidence Doesn't Matter: Human Trafficking Cases in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article considers the ways in which the political pressures that have structured Canada’s involvement in the fight against human trafficking and the on-the-ground enforcement of laws adopted through Canada’s positioning as an anti-trafficking nation have created a problem that necessitates regulation. Although the problem could be interpreted as a legal fiction, its effects are real and include greater restrictions on migrants, a lack of attention to wide-ranging labour abuses, and the tightening of the net around sex work. Résumé Cet article considère les moyens par lesquels les pressions politiques, qui ont structuré la participation du Canada à la lutte contre la traite des personnes et l’application sur le terrain des lois adoptées suite au positionnement du Canada en tant que nation opposée à la traite, ont créé un problème qui exige une réglementation. Bien que le problème puisse être interprété comme une fiction juridique, ses effets sont réels et comprennent des restrictions plus importantes sur les migrants, un manque d’attention aux abus considérables en matière de droit du travail et le resserrement du filet autour du travail du sexe.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".