MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895797316 · doi:10.1017/9789048523429.005

Social Integration of Immigrants into Multiracial Singapore

2014· other· en· W2895797316 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mathew Mathews, Danielle Hong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocioeconomic Development in Asia
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationSociologyGender studiesGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction While most modern nation-states are multicultural to some degree in that they are composed of people with distinct ethno-racial, linguistic, or religious cultures, the level of interaction and exposure of those who are culturally different is sometimes limited based on geographical boundaries and group segregation practices. Globalization and its concomitant immigration has, however, increased population diversity particularly in economically developed societies. This has led a number of societies to adopt multicultural policies to deal with immigration. Essentially such policies are meant to ensure the inclusion of immigrant populations into mainstream society, improve their social and economic position, and accord them equal rights. While previously seen as crucial for social cohesion, in more recent years a number of European societies have questioned the utility of such policies. The cultures of immigrants are handled differently depending on the framework of multiculturalism that is used in a particular nation-state. Vasu distinguishes between two broad forms of multiculturalism – mild and a hard form. Mild multiculturalism, as found in the United States, acknowledges the reality of a plural society and guarantees that a spectrum of identities will mark society. Nevertheless, it does not commit to any one identity thriving in the nation-state and so does not find a compelling reason to preserve a particular group. Embracing hard multiculturalism on the other hand means that nation-states work to preserve individual group rights. Politics in such nation-states is intricately connected to the greater project of ensuring that groups are able to affirm their differences and that minority groups are recognized, protected, and given political representation. Canada, for example, passed the 1988 Canadian Multiculturalism Act, making it the first country to pass a national multiculturalism law affirming multiculturalism as a “fundamental value of Canadian society.” Besides constitutional measures and legislation, Canada also has multicultural programmes operating from the municipal to the provincial and federal government levels. Although nation-states that adopt the hard multiculturalism model endeavour to preserve minority rights, their official positions may not resonate with the interests of mainstream populations. Research on European societies, many of which practice hard multiculturalism, shows that the mainstream population is generally neutral about multiculturalism – objectionable to discrimination of new immigrants but not open to new immigrants maintaining their culture.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.316 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocioeconomic Development in AsiaFrench-language works237,207