MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3208538568 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14647110.v1

Regionalization of Immigrant Settlement in Ontario : Exploring Experiences of Small and Medium Sized Reception Centres

2021· preprint· en· W3208538568 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hannah Goodbrand

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSettlement (finance)ImmigrationGeographyEconomic geographyPopulationCategorizationHuman settlementEconomic growthRegional sciencePolitical scienceEconomyDemographic economicsDevelopment economicsSociologyDemographyBusinessEconomicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the regionalization of immigrant settlement in Canada’s smaller cities which has not been sufficiently addressed in Canada’s largest province, Ontario. The paper investigates this through a comprehensive review of the existing Canadian literature and research into the changing volume of immigrant settlement and the social geography of Ontario’s smaller cities from 1996 to 2015. This research is conducted through the development of a categorization system which orders Ontario’s CMAs into tiers based on total immigrant population. Two tiers are then compared to reveal any general trends or anomalies which could contribute to the understanding of regionalization in Ontario. A lack of evidence for significant regionalization was found, however, growth in the visible minority populations of some CMAs suggested the development of new international migration pathways. The findings of this paper reaffirm the need for further research in immigrant settlement in smaller Canadian cities.

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)0.004
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0140.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMigration and Labor Dynamics→French-language works237,207→