MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W97160517

Law and Border: The Seven-Hundred-Mile-Fence Proposal and the Rule of Law

2008· article· en· W97160517 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ann Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueThinkTech (Texas Tech University) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFence (mathematics)MileLawPolitical scienceGeographyEngineeringGeodesy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article proposes that the current immigration policy does not work and should be replaced with a universally enforceable immigration policy that can be successfully implemented. Because of limited resources, the new immigration policy must balance the following issues: the rule of law, human rights, national security, the economy’s dependence on cheap migrant labor, the costs and benefits of Mexican migrant workers, and the meaning of being an American. The author recommends decoupling national security and immigration policies, reducing spending and focus on militarization of the border, establishing a path for legalization of undocumented workers, and resuming bilateral talks with Mexico. The article discusses the proposed fence along the United States-Mexico border. The author explains this fence does not address the immigration concerns with the Canadian border, sea borders, or international airports. Next, the author explains how current immigration policy does not follow the rule of law. The author discusses the trade-offs we face in the implementation of a sound immigration policy. The author discusses human rights concerns arising from the current immigration policy. The author provides a history of immigration reform from the 1800s to the present day. The author concludes with recommendations for a better immigration policy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThinkTech (Texas Tech University)Same topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207