MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3143768368 · doi:10.20381/ruor-19233

The impact of restrictive immigration policies on human trafficking in Canada

2009· dissertation· en· W3143768368 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maja Muftic

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2009
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman traffickingImmigrationPolitical scienceImmigration policyCriminologyDevelopment economicsSociologyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trafficking human beings is a global phenomenon that has garnered increasing international attention in recent years. Globalization has created a growing awareness of Western socio-economic advantages among people of poorer, developing countries, and has led to a pursuit of legal and illegal methods of migration. International concerns regarding heightened national security, stemming from the global war on terrorism, have implications on illegal methods of migration, in particular human trafficking. Over the past two decades, many immigrant-receiving countries, including Canada, have repositioned the immigration issue as a security threat and foreigners or migrants are now seen as outside the circle of legality. Thus, Western governments implemented stricter immigration policies with more rigorous border controls to ensure the security and stability of their nation. This thesis investigates the relationship between stricter migration policies and human trafficking. Restrictive immigration policies in Canada confine migrants into exploitative temporary visa programs such as exotic dancers and live-in caregivers. Studies and available information demonstrate these programs leave migrants extremely vulnerable and susceptible to exploitation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0170.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)Same topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207