MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991204635 · doi:10.1093/bjc/azz066

No-Fly Lists, National Security and Race: The Experiences of Canadian Muslims

2019· article· en· W2991204635 on OpenAlexaffabout
Baljit Nagra, Paula Maurutto

Bibliographic record

VenueThe British Journal of Criminology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRace (biology)TerrorismPolitical scienceEconomic JusticePublic administrationPublic relationsSociologyGender studiesLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite the increasing use of no-fly lists in countries like the United States, United Kingdom and Canada, their impact has not been explored in academic research. In a bid to fill this gap, we conducted 70 in-depth interviews with Muslim community leaders to explore Canadian Muslims’ experience of the no-fly list. We find the Canadian no-fly list targets Muslim communities, restricts mobility, separates individuals from family and friends, diminishes professional and economic opportunities, and stigmatizes those labelled a security risk. Drawing on the preventive security literature and critical race studies of counter-terrorism, this research demonstrates how no-fly lists erode fundamental aspects of justice, and reproduce racial hierarchies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe British Journal of CriminologySame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207