Pilot Project: \nA 20 Year Comparison on Immigration Retention in NL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study focusses on the retention of newcomers as residents in Newfoundland and \nLabrador (NL) once they arrive here for the first time. In light of recent provincial policy \ndevelopments intended to put in place measures to encourage newcomers to stay and settle here, this \nprojects has reviewed and analysed: (1) new data from newcomers in 2008/09; (2) data gathered by \nthe Coalition on Richer Diversity (CORD) from 2007 to 2008 on stakeholders’ views on \nnewcomers’ experiences and satisfactions since they first arrived here; and finally (3) information \nfrom an ethnographic study done with refugees in St. John’s in the 1980s concerning a range of their \nexperiences as newcomers (Gilad, 1990). The present research project is a preliminary study on \nways to inform on-going public and community efforts to retain newcomers in this province. A \nprinciple used here is to draw as much information as possible from the perspectives of newcomers \nthemselves.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".