La réforme du système d’octroi de l’asile au Canada : où en sommes-nous ? (The Refugee Reform in Canada: Where Do We Stand?)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: Au cours des deux dernieres decennies, le Canada a adopte un ensemble de mesures restrictives a l’egard des demandeurs du statut de refugie. Ces mesures refletent une approche securitaire des migrations, qui a commence a la fin des annees 1990 et qui s’est intensifiee sous le regime conservateur du Premier ministre Harper (2006-2015). La reforme du systeme d’octroi de l’asile de 2012 constitue un des programmes phares du gouvernement precedent. Cette reforme n’a pas permis d’atteindre les objectifs vises par le gouvernement canadien, mais elle a eu plusieurs effets nefastes sur les droits fondamentaux des demandeurs d’asile. Malgre un changement de cap majeur annonce sous le regime liberal du Premier ministre Trudeau, elu a l’automne 2015, de nombreux aspects controverses de la reforme de 2012 sont toujours en place. Les tribunaux ont permis de corriger certains problemes, mais des changements legislatifs s’averent plus que necessaires. English Abstract: In the last two decades, Canada has applied a series of restrictive measures towards refugee claimants. These measures highlight a security approach to migration, which started in the late 1990s and became stronger under the Conservative government of Prime Minister Harper (2006-2015). The 2012 Refugee Reform is one of the key programs of the previous government. The Reform hasn’t reached its stated goals, but it has had several negative consequences for refugee claimants’ human rights. Despite a change in tone since the Liberal government of Prime Minister Trudeau came into power in Fall 2015, many controversial aspects of the Refugee Reform are still in place. Court decisions have corrected some problems but legislative changes are now more than necessary.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".