MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285676784 · doi:10.29173/crossings45

International Students for long-term prosperity in Canadian economy: Expanding pathways to permanence for international students in Canada

2022· article· en· W4285676784 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Supreet Grewal

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossings An Undergraduate Arts Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProsperityResidenceImmigrationWork (physics)Political scienceTerm (time)PoliticsRanking (information retrieval)Public relationsEconomic growthBusinessEconomicsEngineeringDemographic economicsLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On January 1, 2015, Canada launched its Express Entry system in Canada, requiring foreign nationals to submit an Expression of Interest (EOI) and wait for an invitation before being allowed to apply for permanent residence. The intentions behind this system were to speed up the processing of immigration applications to avoid a backlog. However, these modifications created several barriers to the permanency of international students because not many international students qualify under the Express Entry system’s comprehensive ranking criteria. Recognizing, politics and policy fail to develop efficient pathways for graduating international students to acquire permanent residency. This policy brief will provide suggestions regarding work experience, increased allowable hours, and other improvements to the current immigration system, to make it accessible for graduating international students to compete in the Express Entry system, increasing their chances for permanent residence.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0280.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.311 · 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
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrossings An Undergraduate Arts JournalSame topicMigration, Ethnicity, and EconomyFrench-language works237,207