Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Global Compacts on Refugees and Migrants have been widely considered as opportunities for the world to reconsider old approaches to refugee and migrant protection. The New York Declaration is global, not only because it emanates from a global institution, but also because of the following aspects, to be detailed in course of this article: First, a single declaration covering subjects of migration and forced migration is an acknowledgment of the reality that the two have deep relations, and that population flows are increasingly mixed and massive, defying neat categorization. Second, the declaration also highlights the limits and/or unwillingness of states to carry primary responsibility of refugees and migrants, and hence opens up the possibility to include the “whole of society,” which is to say the “whole of globe” covering stakeholders including business and commercial segments. Third, the new approach is global because refugees and migrants are conceptualized as subjects of global development. Fourth, migration and refugee “crises” are considered inevitable, hence the need for durable solutions, such as the need for a globally relevant comprehensive response framework. And finally, the article touches on the changing nature of the rights question under such a technological mode of management. These aspects are not discussed separately in order, but in an interrelated way. The article is a post-colonial critique of an emerging global apparatus of care and power.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.073 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".