Canada’s Alternative to Immigration Detention Program: A Soft-Law Instrument
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Announced in 2016, the Government of Canada introduced the alternatives to immigration detention program (ATIDP), which provides conditional release to non-citizens being detained in Canada’s immigration detention system. This paper will outline the details and operations of the ATIDP, providing readers with an understanding of the specific alternatives offered within the ATIDP, the referral process to the ATIDP, the application of the ATIDP at the Immigration and Refugee Board, and some identified challenges and impacts of the program. Additionally, this research seeks to define the respective role of the Canada Border Services Agency and the Immigration and Refugee Board as it pertains to the governance of the ATIDP. This paper will illustrate that the ATIDP is a ‘soft-law’ immigration policy applied within an administrative legal framework. Thus, creating a set of complex issues pertaining to discretionary control of the ATIDP, access to fair and just alternatives, and the role of the CBSA within immigration detention.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".