MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3100020471 · doi:10.22215/etd/2020-14215

Welcoming Refugees and the Virtue of Hospitality: An Analysis of Refugee Resettlement through Private Sponsorship in Small-Town Eastern Ontario

2020· dissertation· en· W3100020471 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julie Neelin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeHospitalityPolitical scienceNarrativePower (physics)SociologyPublic relationsTourismLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the wake of the refugee crisis in Syria, national narratives of welcome propelled new trends of private sponsorship into rural communities across Canada. Through the Private Sponsorship of Refugees Program, sponsors are responsible for supporting the transition of refugee-newcomers into Canadian society. This study offers an analysis of private sponsorship from the perspectives and experiences of those that have mobilized to welcome refugees into small-towns in Eastern Ontario. Drawing on the concept of hospitality to analyze the dynamics of private sponsorship, I examine how everyday acts of welcome are informed by feelings of compassion, but also reinforce dynamics of power that perpetuate systems of control and dependency. Through an examination of the challenges experienced by refugee-newcomers, I highlight the major flaws of the program, calling for a critical evaluation of Canada's models of resettlement to reflect the authority of migrants to act as independent agents of their own mobility.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0270.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207