Особливості формування державної імміграційної політики окремих розвинених країн
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is devoted to the issues of immigration policy, which is an important political tool for achieving social goals in the field of economy, demography, security and nation building. In today's world, developed countries have joined the competition for highly skilled migrants and quality carriers of human capital, using immigration as an important resource for economic and demographic development. The unfavorable demographic situation formed in Ukraine before the beginning of the new millennium forces us to consider migration as an important resource, the use of which can compensate for the natural decrease in population. In traditional countries of reception of immigrants, there are serious problems in addressing the integration of migrants, national security, tolerance, socio-economic stability and intercultural dialogue. The immigration policy of Great Britain, Australia, Canada is studied and it is determined that any immigration policy is not without contradictions, its mechanism evolves and develops, and the institutional framework is formed within a certain political regime and reflects the political culture, values, goals of the nation. The essential characteristics of political regulation and levels of immigration policy of developed countries are formulated. Focus on the main components of the immigration policy of the studied countries, namely, issues related to the reception of migrants; the problems of their integration and socialization allow us to say that a special place among the factors that determine the process of development and implementation of immigration policy is occupied by the political regime.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.007 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".