MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405001111 · doi:10.1515/9780776636429-043

CHAPTER F-4 Border Closures: A Pandemic of Symbolic Acts in the Time of COVID-19

2020· book-chapter· en· W4405001111 on OpenAlexaff
Steven J. Hoffman, Patrick Fafard

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Ottawa Press eBooks · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Deviance, and Social Control
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Pandemic2019-20 coronavirus outbreakVirologyMedicineInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)Outbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

COVID-19 provoked unprecedented national border closures.Some countries stopped travel from particular regions, despite evidence that such closures are ineffective and illegal under the International Health Regulations (IHRs).Even more countries banned all incoming travel by non-citizens.It has been suggested that these more restrictive total border closures are theoretically effective and arguably permissible under international law.Yet a closer analysis reveals that total border closures are probably still illegal given the IHRs require countries to adopt less restrictive alternatives when possible, such as a 14-day quarantine order for incoming travellers.If border closures are largely ineffective and illegal, then why have at least 142 countries implemented them?The answer lies in the realities of politics.Even if governments know the science and law of border closures, they still feel compelled to enact them because of intense domestic pressure * Dahdaleh Distinguished Chair in Global Governance and Legal Epidemiology, and Professor of Global Health, Law, and Political Science at

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.006

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Ottawa Press eBooksSame topicCrime, Deviance, and Social ControlFrench-language works237,207