Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Since the birth of cinema at the end of the 19th century, there has been a fascination with discourses of migration, especially since its rise as a media technology coincided with the last phase of colonialism and the global wave of settlement associated with it. For example, in Canada, the United States, and Australia, film was recognized as early as the first part of the 20th century as a means of drawing settlers to desired areas or as a method for instructing newcomers on how to blend with the society. Certainly, in countries like the United States, many filmmakers, such as Ernst Lubitsch, Alfred Hitchcock, Fritz Lang, and Jean Renoir, were themselves immigrants who recognized the inherent dramatic potential of immigrant narratives, focused on individuals who have left the safety of home and family for strange lands where they must struggle to fit in with cultures often hostile to their presence. By the 1950s, film often played a major role globally in the liberation of countries from colonialism, as a tool of documentation and propaganda, and as a means of reestablishing pride in race and nation. Contemporary films on migration often depict the movement of peoples as a global phenomenon that not only blurs the boundaries between nations, but calls into question the very nature of those boundaries.
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 | 0.005 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.002 |
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".