MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7136011444

Reform of the Canadian immigration system 2008-2014: permanent economic migration

2017· dissertation· cs· W7136011444 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Markéta Koudelková

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languagecs
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationGovernment (linguistics)Immigration policyIdeologyEconomic analysisFocus (optics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The thesis "Reform of the Canadian immigration system 2008-2014: permanent economic migration" analyses the reasons which, in the period of 2008-2014, led the Canadian federal government to abandon the points based system Canada used for choosing high-skilled immigrants and establish a new hybrid system called Express Entry. First, the thesis examines the individual steps in the reform, the changes made in selection criteria and the way the government implemented new measures. The second part focuses on the ideology of the ruling Conservative Party of Canada and its influence over the reforms, then it explores the government's concept of ideal immigration system and its intended outcomes, and finally it spells out the main problems present in the existing points based system. The main focus is on content analysis of documents produced by the conservative party and the federal government, supplemented by evidence from secondary literature. In conclusion, the broader impact of the changes in Canadian economic immigration system is briefly discussed.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.899

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0110.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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