MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2554844429

The Case for Free Immigration Agreements

2008· article· en· W2554844429 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John Humphreys

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitute of Public Affairs Review: A Quarterly Review of Politics and Public Affairs, The · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTaxation and Legal Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationFree flowFree trade agreementFree tradeInternational tradeFree movementPolitical scienceBusinessLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) allow for the relatively free flow of goods and services between the member countries in the recognition that such agreements are often in their mutual interests. The author argues that the same rationale can be used regarding the free flow of people - free immigration agreements. Australia already has a comprehensive FIA agreement with New Zealand as part of our free trade agreement called 'Closer Economic Relations'. The suggestion in this article is that Australia should start to be pro-active in searching out appropriate partners for FIAs. Good potential candidate countries for an FIA include Singapore, Canada, Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, Ireland and the Netherlands among others.

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.023
Scholarly communication0.0170.027
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0220.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitute of Public Affairs Review: A Quarterly Review of Politics and Public Affairs, TheSame topicTaxation and Legal IssuesFrench-language works237,207