MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231348718 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14636508.v1

Municipal Responses to ‘Illegality’: Urban Sanctuary across National Contexts

2021· preprint· en· W4231348718 on OpenAlexaffabout
Harald Bauder, Dayana A Gonzalez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersAlbert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg
KeywordsCITESSolidarityScope (computer science)Urban policyContext (archaeology)GeopoliticsPolitical scienceGeographyScale (ratio)Economic growthPublic administrationUrban planningPoliticsCartographyLawCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cities often seek to mitigate the highly precarious situation of Illegalized (or undocumented) migrants. In this context, “sanctuary cites” are an innovative urban response to exclusionary national policies. In this article, we expand the geographical scope of sanctuary policies and practices beyond Canada, the USA, and the UK, where the policies and practices are well-known. In particular, we explore corresponding urban initiatives in Chile, Germany, and Spain. We find that varying kinds of urban-sanctuary policies and practices permit illegalized migrants to cope with their situations in particular national contexts. However, different labels, such as “city of refuge,” “commune of reception,” or “solidarity city” are used to describe such initiatives. While national, historical, and geopolitical contexts distinctly shape local efforts to accommodate illegalized migrants, recognizing similarities across national contexts is important to develop globally-coordinated and internationally-inspired responses at the urban scale.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207