Canadian Refugee Policy & Sexual Orientation : an Analysis of an Innovative yet Implicit Guardian of Freedom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many countries around the world, homosexuality continues to be labeled a mental disease, penalized as a crime by the law, condemned as a sin by religious institutions, and even punishable by torture and execution by state authorities. As such, refugee claims based on sexual orientation have began to rise in such ‘Western’ states as Canada that protect sexual minorities. While there is no country in the world where sexual minorities are entirely free from harassment and oppression, thousands of claims have been filed with the belief that Canada is a beacon of hope and freedom. Through a comprehensive analysis of the five stages of the policy process, this research will prove that while Canada must establish clearer, more equitable guidelines than those previously developed in the landmark case of Canada v. Ward for assessing a refugee claim based on sexual orientation, the country has upheld its signatory duty to the international community to protect asylum-seekers with a ‘well-founded’ fear of persecution.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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".