MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392783257 · doi:10.5539/ijbm.v19n2p67

Assessing the Efficacy of Canada’s Pre-Arrival Settlement Services on Immigrant Integration: A Comprehensive Analysis of the New Immigration Pre-Landing Settlement Service

2024· article· en· W4392783257 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sabina Maharjan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business and Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSettlement (finance)ImmigrationService (business)GeographyPolitical scienceBusinessArchaeologyMarketingFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has the tradition of welcoming the immigrants from the diverse background. It aims to assess the efficacy of new immigrant pre-arrival settlements on immigrant integrations in Canada. Understanding the importance of immigrant integration, Canada strongly emphasizes on the pre-arrival services with the knowledge to represent the innovative approach. This research studies on the dependent variable i.e. New Immigrant Integration and independent variables i.e. duration of pre-arrival settlement, access to pre-arrival information and resources, and cultural sensitivity of pre-arrival settlement services. The researcher uses quantitative method and examine data from service providers and contemporary immigrants. The study evaluates immigrant integration based on employment rates, dialect abilities, social integration and satisfaction with settlement services. The relationship between independent and dependent variables is assessed using statistical tools i.e. multiple regression prove the hypothesis of the study. The findings in this study contribute to a deeper understanding on the efficacy of Canada's pre-arrival settlements with the evidence. It contributes the insights for the policy makers and service providers for successful immigrant integration in Canadian Society.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.295 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business and ManagementSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207