MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7135938748

Multiculturalism in crisis? Rhetoric vs, policy changes in the new century (cases of Canada and the United Kingdom)

2015· dissertation· cs· W7135938748 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Filip Menyhard

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languagecs
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhetoricMulticulturalismContradictionImmigrationCriticismGovernment (linguistics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the recent speeches of David Cameron and some other European politicians, multiculturalism has failed and it is necessary to make significant changes in immigration and integration policies. In Canada, however, multiculturalism is still a state policy, which is widely supported by the general public. The bachelor's thesis Multiculturalism in crisis? Rhetoric vs. policy changes in the new century (cases of Canada and the United Kingdom) is trying to answer a question if the critical rhetoric of British politicians has triggered real policy changes towards ethnic minorities and immigrants or if it only follows the changes that were started before they came to power. In Canada, the thesis is trying to learn, if the rhetoric supporting multiculturalism does not omit some policy changes, that would be in contradiction towards the original idea of multiculturalism. The author claims that multiculturalism in Canada has much deeper roots than in the UK and that the Canadian model differs signifiantly from the one in Britain. These facts directly affect the rhetoric of politicians, for whom is the criticism of multiculturalism not advantageous. The current Canadian government therefore does not reflect in its rhetoric on its current policy changes, that are in contradiction towards the original...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0410.046
Scholarly communication0.0180.006
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature)Same topicPolitical Systems and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207