The Immigration Process and Minority Identities: Where We Are and What We Still Need to Know
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The immigration process impacts the identity of ethnocultural, racial, religious, and linguistic minority Canadians. The immigration process refers to that of landing (as immigrant or refugee) and settling in Canada. Although the beginning point is well-defined, the end point may vary with each individual and group. However, settlement is not synonymous with adaptation, integration, civic engagement, and (social) citizenship with its concomitant identity formation; all of these are processes that may go on for life. While all Canadians, whether immigrants, minorities or official majorities, are constantly being touched by on-going immigration which changes the fabric of Canadian society every day, this paper focuses only on those minority Canadians who have actually been through the immigration process. As we go through the different streams of academic literature focusing on identity change subsequent to the immigration of ethnocultural, racial, religious and linguistic groups to Canada, we find that the boundaries are both blurred and mobile over time. Indeed, these categories are social constructions and the identities based thereupon vary over time as a result
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 | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.035 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".