Migration due to sexual orientation and gender identity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of the term refugee is set out in Art. 1, item I of the Law 9.474 / 97 of the Foreign Statute of Brazil, which defines a refugee as any individual with a well-founded fear of persecution due to race, religion, nationality, political opinion or social group. The Convention of 1951 does not establish a specific category for persecution related to sexual orientation or gender identity. In many countries homosexuality is punished by imprisonment, or the death penalty (Saudi Arabia, Iran, Yemen, Mauritania and Sudan, as well as in regions of Nigeria and Somalia), among other penalties that deny full citizenship, segregate, discriminate and deny rights to this group. Due to the persecution these individuals suffer in their home countries, it is possible to ask: were gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and intersex individuals included in the social group category due to its flexible criteria? The United States, Canada and several European countries have been accepting refugee applications for individuals with well-founded fear of persecution because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. By employing this criterion, the CONARE (National Committee for Refugees of Brazil) has granted refuge to gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and intersex individuals who are persecuted in their home countries due to their sexual orientation or gender identity. This article explores the concept of the term refugee and its expansion over the past years, focusing especially on the basis of the refugee criterion related to social group. The aim is therefore to analyze the category of social group in the concept of refugee. It also aims to examine the possibility of framing said populations in the category of social group in order to facilitate their obtainment of a Refugee status.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".