MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913174466 · doi:10.33182/bc.v9i1.674

Trump, Migration, and Agriculture

2019· article· en· W2913174466 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philip Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueBORDER CROSSING · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Development and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationRefugeeQuarter (Canadian coin)Political scienceGovernment (linguistics)Immigration policyEconomic growthGeographyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The US is the country of immigration, with almost 20 per cent of the world’s 260 million international migrants. The number two country with international migrants, Germany, has 12 million, a fourth as many as the almost 48 million foreign-born US residents (UN DESA, 2017). The US stands alone among industrial countries in having a quarter of its immigrants, almost 11 million, unauthorised (Passel and Cohn, 2018). President Trump made reducing illegal immigration a priority. Major migration issues today include the fate of programs such as DACA, what to do about Central American families who apply for asylum, and whether to build a wall on the Mexico-US border. In December 2018-January 2019, there was a partial shutdown of the federal government, the third in Trump’s first two years as President, because Congress failed to include $5 billion for the border wall in bills that fund DHS and other federal agencies. Meanwhile, Mexico agreed to issue humanitarian visas to Central Americans who enter the US and apply for asylum, so that Central American asylum seekers may wait in Mexico for US decisions on their cases

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)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBORDER CROSSINGSame topicAgricultural Development and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207