MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385727295 · doi:10.32920/23929164

Settlement and Integration Research Synthesis 2009-2013

2023· preprint· en· W4385727295 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
John Shields, Adnan Türegün, Sophia Lowe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of TorontoYork University
KeywordsOperationalizationSettlement (finance)Social integrationContext (archaeology)CitizenshipPoliticsDiversity (politics)Government (linguistics)Political scienceSociologyPublic relationsPublic administrationEconomic growthBusinessGeographyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synthesizing research into (im)migrant settlement and integration can be a daunting task since the area covers the entire domestic (receiving society) end of the migration process, including any public support extended to (im)migrants. Settlement and integration have economic, social, political, and cultural components, in addition to an interactional, residual core which is not reducible to any component. In the Canadian context, settlement and integration can be operationalized both in formal terms such as the acquisition of permanent residence and citizenship, and in substantive terms such as language acquisition, education and training, employment and self-employment, civic and political participation, sense of belonging, and social inclusion in general. Covering this range of topics coupled with the activities of public (government and civic) institutions to support newcomers in all their diversity can indeed be challenging.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.787

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0170.052
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.005

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→