MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4231264084 · doi:10.1057/9780230246799_5

Kenya

2009· book-chapter· en· W4231264084 on OpenAlexaff
James Milner

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeePraiseGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceEconomic growthPublic administrationLawEconomicsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kenya’s asylum policy was profoundly affected by the arrival of over 400,000 refugees from Somalia in 1991 and 1992. After initially trying to prevent their arrival, Kenya opened its borders and allowed hundreds of thousands of refugees to enter its territory, a move that won praise from the international donor community for the regime of President Daniel arap Moi. At the same time, however, Kenya placed significant restrictions on the quality of asylum it extended to refugees. Claiming that the sheer number of new arrivals had caused the collapse of Kenya’s previously open asylum policy, the government ceased to conduct individual status determination interviews for new asylum seekers. Refugee affairs were transferred almost exclusively to UNHCR, who became responsible for the establishment and running of camps in government-designated areas. Finally, Kenya imposed restrictions on access to employment and freedom of movement for refugees, stipulating that refugees live in designated camps. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4500.208

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks→Same topicMigration, Refugees, and Integration→French-language works237,207→