MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885097473 · doi:10.1353/ces.2018.0014

A Preliminary Investigation into Private Refugee Sponsors

2018· article· en· W2885097473 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Audrey Macklin, Kathryn Barber, Luin Goldring, Jennifer Hyndman, Anna C. Korteweg, Shauna Labman, Jona Zyfi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian ethnic studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeCitizenshipPolitical sciencePerspective (graphical)Public relationsDisplaced personAsylum seekerPhenomenonSociologyPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Faith-based and other civil society organizations, along with more ad-hoc groups of Canadians, have sustained a continuous program of private refugee sponsorship in Canada for 40 years. The Syrian refugee exodus inspired thousands of Canadians with little or no prior experience to also take up refugee sponsorship. Little is known about private sponsors, their characteristics and experiences, and the impact of sponsorship on them. This article undertakes two tasks. First, it sketches the contours of a large, interdisciplinary project investigating the phenomenon of private refugee sponsorship from the perspective of Canadian sponsors of Syrians, including both long-term and new sponsors. The project asks how the project of welcoming refugees remakes the citizenship of Canadians. Second, the article presents original data selected from a survey of over 500 sponsors of recently arrived Syrians. We conclude with future directions for research and analysis.

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)0.010
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0120.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.142
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations50
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian ethnic studiesSame topicMiddle East and Rwanda ConflictsFrench-language works237,207