MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Crise ou transformation ? Revisiter l’exceptionnalisme migratoire québécois

2025· article· fr· W4409987550 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Catherine Xhardez, Chedly Belkhodja

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Possibles · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La question migratoire occupe une place de plus en plus centrale dans le débat public québécois. Le Québec se distingue par son autonomie dans la sélection et l’installation des personnes immigrantes, l’importance accordée à la langue française et sa propre approche de l’accueil. Pourtant, les profondes transformations récentes des politiques et des discours sur la migration interrogent cette singularité. Cette introduction situe le Québec dans son rapport à l’immigration permanente et à la migration temporaire sous deux angles : d’abord dans le contexte de l’exceptionnalisme migratoire canadien; ensuite, dans un contexte propre à la province en mettant en lumière ses particularités tout en les confrontant à d’autres sociétés. Nous soutenons que ce qui distingue le Québec du reste du Canada ne réside pas tant dans ses dynamiques migratoires que dans les cadres d’interprétation qui les accompagnent. Plus largement, nous mettons en avant l’importance de renforcer le lien entre recherche et débat public informé en proposant, au sein de ce numéro, des contributions qui analysent les transformations en cours, les rapports de force qui les façonnent et la redéfinition du modèle québécois d’(im)migration.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.020
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue PossiblesSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207