Multiculturalism in Netherlands and Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diploma thesis focuses on integration policies in the Netherlands and Canada since 1970' s till nowadays. Both countries are well known for implementing multiculturalism. Canada has become the only country that through Multiculturalism Act claimed official support for multiculturalism policy and is still doing so even recently when this model is being refused by most of the other countries. Such a situation developed in the Netherlands which became an example of a failure of multiculturalism. However multiculturalism was of a different kind in each of those countries and so was the final form of integration policies. The aim of this diploma thesis is to analyse similarities and differences in both integration policies and to find relevant factors that impacted their failure in the Netherlands and their success in Canada. Diploma thesis describes the basic milestones in the development of integration policies and changes in the respective time period. It also points out the main differences in the concept of multiculturalism in the Netherlands and Canada and tries to explain it on the historical, state building, national identity and multiculture background.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it