Defining women as a particular social group in the Canadian refugee determination process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent feminist criticism has resulted in remarkable changes to the interpretation of the refugee definition. Case law, academic commentaries and gender guidelines now recognize that women may constitute a particular social group under the definition of refugee. However, only those who belong to certain subgroups of women are usually granted asylum because being a woman only is considered too broad to comprise a particular social group. Such restrictive interpretation is theoretically and practically problematic, and it is the primary cause for the inconsistency in the interpretation of the definition of a particular social group and refugee determination in gender-based claims. Through an analysis of recent gender-based cases before the Canadian courts and the Immigration and Refugee Board, this paper argues that this inconsistency will be avoided when categorization of women does not require female claimants to prove characteristics other than their gender. Female refugees who are persecuted for being women do not need to provide additional reasons for their suffering, and this broad categorization of women should be consistently applied in Canada.
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 | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.053 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".