<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|>You are an expert on climate change, human mobility and migration. Answer the question truthfully.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|>Here are the title and abstract of a scientific paper probably related to climate change, human mobility and migration..
Title:"Between a Rock and a Hard Place: a Human Rights Assessment of the Fate of Excluded Asylum-seekers and Criminal Refugees in Australia."
Abstract:"Migrants fearing harm in their own country may benefit from the protection of refugee law. This protection, however, is not extended to those considered undeserving of it, for example, because they committed atrocities in the past, and may be removed from those who become a threat to the host State's national security. In practice, States need to find solutions for such migrants, who are often failed asylum-seekers or criminal refugees who lost their protection status. In this regard, Australia is infamous for its extensive use of immigration detention, which is frequently applied to such migrants. The country's practices have stirred much academic debate and gave rise to a multitude of legal cases and legislation changes. This contribution provides a human rights assessment of Australia's practices towards failed asylum-seekers and criminal refugees, showing that when faced with such migrants, States may adopt measures that violate their international human rights obligations, such as returning them to harm or placing them in indefinite detention. As States are increasingly adopting similar practices, especially regarding the use of immigration detention, this analysis of the Australian context can inform the assessment of these practices anywhere they may be applied.."
I have six questions you need to answer.
Q1: Is this article is about 'human migration mobility': 1 = yes; 0 = no. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q2: What drivers of migration and mobility does the article study? 0 = 'other', 1 = 'climate', 2 = 'environment', 3 = 'economic', 4 = 'conflict', 5 = 'political', 6 = 'social', 7 = 'family'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q3: What is the overall sentiment of the article?:0 = 'neutral', 1 = 'negative', 2 = 'positive'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q4: What type of climate or environmental keywords are explicitly mentioned?:  0 = 'none', 1 = 'algal blooms', 2 = 'infestation', 3 = 'infectious diseases', 4 = 'ocean acidification', 5 = 'sea ice', 6 = 'acid rain', 7 = 'drought', 8 = 'cold wave', 9 = 'heat wave', 10 = 'glacial', 11 = 'wildfire', 12 = 'air pollution', 13 = 'biodiversity loss', 14 = 'coastal erosion', 15 = 'land degradation', 16 = 'deforestation', 17 = 'desertification', 18 = 'water pollution', 19 = 'diebacks', 20 = 'permafrost loss', 21 = 'sand mining', 22 = 'sea level rise', 23 = 'earthquake', 24 = 'tsunami', 25 = 'volcanic', 26 = 'flood', 27 = 'avalanche', 28 = 'landslide', 29 = 'downburst', 30 = 'thunderstorm', 31 = 'sandstorm', 32 = 'haze', 33 = 'storm', 34 = 'cyclone', 35 = 'blizzard', 36 = 'hail', 37 = 'snow', 38 = 'tornado', 39 = 'wind', 40 = 'hurricane', 41 = 'typhoon', 42 = 'other'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q5: What discipline does the article belong to?: 0 = 'other', 1 = 'social science', 2 = 'natural science', 3 = 'arts and humanities', 4 = 'multidiscipline and interdiscipline'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q6: Does the article apply quantitative and/or statistical analysis?: 0 = 'no', 1 = 'yes'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Use the following template: 

Q1 = [];
Q2 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [];
Q5 = [];
Q6 = [].<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|>Answer:
Q1 = [1];
Q2 = [4,5];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [0];
Q5 = [1];
Q6 = [0].
Between a Rock and a Hard Place: a Human Rights Assessment of the Fate of Excluded Asylum-seekers and Criminal Refugees in Australia
Migrants fearing harm in their own country may benefit from the protection of refugee law. This protection, however, is not extended to those considered undeserving of it, for example, because they committed atrocities in the past, and may be removed from those who become a threat to the host State's national security. In practice, States need to find solutions for such migrants, who are often failed asylum-seekers or criminal refugees who lost their protection status. In this regard, Australia is infamous for its extensive use of immigration detention, which is frequently applied to such migrants. The country's practices have stirred much academic debate and gave rise to a multitude of legal cases and legislation changes. This contribution provides a human rights assessment of Australia's practices towards failed asylum-seekers and criminal refugees, showing that when faced with such migrants, States may adopt measures that violate their international human rights obligations, such as returning them to harm or placing them in indefinite detention. As States are increasingly adopting similar practices, especially regarding the use of immigration detention, this analysis of the Australian context can inform the assessment of these practices anywhere they may be applied.