Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Syrian war has brought the massive influx of asylum claimants and refugees across the European Union (EU) into sharp relief. Despite the humanitarian crisis, the international and regional EU responses to the migrant crisis have been inadequate and much too late. First, international organisations such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) have proposed an approach which seems to undermine the original object and purpose of the Refugee Convention, by recognising refugees in groups instead of allowing individualised refugee status determination. Second, the EU approach to trade Syrian refugees one for one from those traveling through Greece to Turkey undermines international protection such as non-refoulement for asylum claimants. It is argued that in order to properly safeguard the rights of asylum claimants, proper substantive and procedural safeguards need to be in place, as well as an enlarged role of the regional courts in the EU in adjudicating asylum decisions. This chapter will explore the international and regional legal responses employed by the UNHCR and the EU in addressing the massive influx of asylum claimants into and across Europe as a result of the Syrian armed conflict.
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 | 0.018 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".