MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4245287374 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14652705

New Migration Motives and New Settlement Challenges: Integration Experience of Korean Immigrants in the Toronto CMA

2021· preprint· en· W4245287374 on OpenAlexaffabout
Byung Chun Oh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationSettlement (finance)GlobalizationHuman capitalPolitical scienceFutures contractDevelopment economicsDemographic economicsEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the migration motives and the integration experiences of recent Korean immigrants in the Toronto CMA, who are significantly different from their previous cohorts in terms of migration motives, socio-economic status, and settlement experiences. These differences can be attributed to changes in social transformation and economic development in Korea as well as to accelerated globalization and global migration trends. Recent Korean immigrants are characterized as middle-income earners who possess higher levels of education, skills, and wealth, with a strong desire to educate their children in developed Western countries where English is an official language. Despite recent Korean immigrants' increased human capital, their labour market integration has experienced great difficulties mainly due to a lack of Canadian official language skills. In addition, since the end of the twentieth Century, Korean migrants have increasingly been choosing Canada over the United States as their destination of migration. This shift indicates that Koreans are looking for new answers in search of better lives for their futures.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.701
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.004
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.265 · 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, Ethnicity, and Economy→French-language works237,207→