Selective Migration Policies With Chinese Characteristics
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Executive Summary This article examines China’s recruitment of high-skilled migrants within a broader comparative analysis of selective migration strategies and adds the neglected Chinese case to the comparative immigration policy literature. China adopted certain selective migration polices from other countries, such as Canada and the United States, but its selective migration strategy does not fit established categories. Beginning in 2013, the Chinese communist government enacted new laws and issued new regulations to attract foreign talent and better regulate the entry, residence and employment of foreigners. The contours of China’s distinctive selective migration policy became more defined as Beijing established a point system combined with a job offer requirement; reformed the Z visa, which is issued to those with a college degree who intend to work in China; established the R visa for exceptionally high-skilled migrants; and adopted more liberal policies on permanent residency for the highly skilled. These policies, combined with the opportunities presented by China’s rapidly growing economy, attracted growing numbers of university graduates and propelled China, to become, for a brief period before the COVID-19 pandemic, a major destination for high-skilled migrants.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it