MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775125487 · doi:10.1177/0964663917746488

What’s in a Category? The Politics of Not Being a Refugee

2017· article· en· W2775125487 on OpenAlexaff
Diana Thomaz

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial & Legal Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeePoliticsContext (archaeology)ImmigrationSovereigntyPolitical scienceImmigration detentionSociologyLawGender studiesCriminologyPolitical economyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How are refugees perceived and governed in contemporary politics? What sort of sovereign responses has been advanced to govern and discipline the movement of people in a globalizing world? The article discusses how the ‘figure of the refugee’ (Scheel and Squire, 2014) or the ‘refugee label’ (Zetter, 1991, 2007) has changed once the Cold War ended and growing numbers of asylum seekers from the global South began searching for protection in the North. It attributes the restrictive character of contemporary asylum politics both to a perception of refugees as abject masses from the South and to sovereign states’ responses to a globalizing reality. In this context, I argue that access to asylum has been restricted both through the mobilization of new sovereign borders that seek to contain the mobility of asylum seekers perceived as villains, and through the creation of new categories or legal limits, in the form of temporary protection statuses to those perceived as passive victims. By focusing on the latter strategy, I briefly explore how Haitian asylum seekers have been labelled as ‘humanitarian immigrants’ in Brazil, highlighting the productivity of this legal limit.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.051
Scholarly communication0.0120.013
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations28
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial & Legal StudiesSame topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207