L’émigration en action. Activités, stratégies et contraintes d’un couple brésilien middling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article traite du processus de prise de décision d’un couple d’ingénieurs brésiliens lors de leur immigration au Québec. La méthode d’analyse est celle des récits de vie. Quatre défis ont été identifiés lors du processus de préparation migratoire : (1) l’annonce de la décision migratoire ; (2) la maîtrise de la langue ; (3) le manque d’informations concernant les démarches à suivre et (4) l’incertitude concernant la capacité d’adaptation à la société de destination. L’analyse indique que la migration se décide d’abord dans la société de départ, se construit à partir des réseaux sociaux des migrants dans la société d’origine et se prépare par la mobilisation et la création de nouvelles ressources, dont les réseaux sociaux virtuels établis avec les immigrants dans la société d’arrivée.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".