Family reunion immigration law system core ： the United States, Canada family reunion immigration policy analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
美国和加拿大都是传统移民国家，家庭团聚是美国、加拿大移民政 策法规的重要组成部分。而对这一问题的研究，中国学术界极为薄弱。加强对家庭团聚移民政策的研究，对于深入剖析美国、加拿大移民法体系，发展两国经济，维持社会稳定与发展，具有重要理论和现实意义。本文分析了美国、加拿大家庭团聚移民政策，认为美国和加拿大都是传统移民国家，家庭团聚是美国、加拿大移民政策法规的重要组成部分，或者说是移民法体系的核心。实施综合移民改革,使家人得以团聚,意义重大，它使国家获得安全,经济得以恢复,这个艰辛而智慧的立法过程,也在最佳程度上反映了美国人和加拿大人的价值观。目前要求放宽家庭团聚的民间呼声持续高涨，体现美国和加拿大人价值观的“家庭团聚”成为难以被忽视的移民改革核心话题。The United States and Canada are traditional nation of immigrants, the United States, Canada family reunion is an important part of the immigration policies and regulations. But the study on this problem, Chinese academia is very weak. To strengthen the family reunion immigration policy research, for in-depth analysis of American, Canadian immigration law system, development of bilateral economy, maintain social stability and development, has the important theory and the practical significance. This paper analyzes the United States, Canada family reunion immigration policy, thinks the United States and Canada are traditional nation of immigrants, the United States, Canada family reunion is an important part of the immigration policies and regulations, or is the immigration law system core. The implementation of comprehensive immigration reform, make family to reunite, the sense is great, it makes national security, economic recovery, the hardships and the wisdom of the legislative process, but also in the best reflect the values Americans and Canadians. At present the requirement relaxes family folk voice rising, the United States and Canadian values embodiment of" family reunion" to be neglected the core topic for immigration reform.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 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".