Doubly flawed: Canada's refugee determination system in a post 9/11 era
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada’s refugee determination system not only remains vulnerable to terrorist exploitation but also fails to assist legitimate refugees in a post 9/11 era. Through conducting an analysis of the Immigration Act, this paper exemplifies how, historically, Canada has had difficulty in regulating refugee migration into the country. The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act was implemented as a means of overhauling the Immigration Act, making for a more secure Canada. Although this newer legislation is successful in maintaining the rights of refugees, especially with the verdict of Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, it still lacks numerous safeguards. The lack of an adequate detainment policy, manifestly unfounded policy, the designated country of origin policy, the appeals process, and delayed deportation of foreign nationals leaves the system vulnerable to abuse by terrorists. Ultimately, Canada has become a potential base for terrorists who have access to the entire international community within the safety of Canadian borders.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".