Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article explore le dilemme de l’immigration au Québec, en mettant en lumière son évolution historique et son impact sur la politique contemporaine. Je retrace d’abord la manière dont le Québec a acquis ses pouvoirs en immigration, les circonstances et parties prenantes qui ont permis cette transformation, ainsi que les effets de ces avancées sur son rapport à la migration. J’explore ensuite comment la reconfiguration du système partisan québécois a redéfini ce dilemme. L’arrivée de la CAQ au pouvoir en 2018 a marqué une rupture avec le consensus sur l’immigration des élites québécoises. Plus généralement, je mets en avant un tournant identitaire dans le discours des élites où la protection de la langue, de l’identité et des valeurs québécoises prend une place centrale. Cette transformation soulève une question plus large : le contrôle accru de l’immigration constitue-t-il un rempart pour un nationalisme progressif et inclusif ou marque-t-il désormais un glissement vers une conception plus restrictive de l’identité québécoise?
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".