MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810176335 · doi:10.4000/revdh.4031

La réforme du système d’octroi de l’asile au Canada : où en sommes-nous ?

2018· article· fr· W2810176335 on OpenAlexaffabout
Delphine Nakache

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des droits de l’homme · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au cours des deux dernières décennies, le Canada a adopté un ensemble de mesures restrictives à l’égard des demandeurs du statut de réfugié. Ces mesures reflètent une approche sécuritaire des migrations, qui a commencé à la fin des années 1990 et qui s’est intensifiée sous le régime conservateur du Premier ministre Harper (2006-2015). La réforme du système d’octroi de l’asile de 2012 constitue un des programmes phares du gouvernement précédent. Cette réforme n’a pas permis d’atteindre les objectifs visés par le gouvernement canadien, mais elle a eu plusieurs effets néfastes sur les droits fondamentaux des demandeurs d’asile. Malgré un changement de cap majeur annoncé sous le régime libéral du Premier ministre Trudeau, élu à l’automne 2015, de nombreux aspects controversés de la réforme de 2012 sont toujours en place. Les tribunaux ont permis de corriger certains problèmes, mais des changements législatifs s’avèrent plus que nécessaires.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.881

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des droits de l’hommeSame topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207