MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1841604550 · doi:10.33182/ml.v11i1.169

Independent migration commissions in Europe: The case of Austria

2014· article· en· W1841604550 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gudrun Biffl

Bibliographic record

VenueMIGRATION LETTERS · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGovernment, Law, and Information Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationInvestment (military)RefugeePopulationForeign direct investmentPopulation ageingIrregular migrationHuman migrationImmigration policyEconomicsBusinessDemographic economicsLabour economicsEconomic policyEconomic geographyPolitical scienceMacroeconomicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Austrian migration policy changed from a demand driven guest worker model between the 1960s and 1980s to chain migration, family reunion and refugee migration in the 1990s. Membership to the EU in 1995 was accompanied by economic migra-tion from other EU-member states due to faster-than-average economic growth in Austria. Population ageing and insufficient investment in further education and train-ing led to labour scarcities and migration policy reforms in 2011 and gave employer demand a key role in selecting immigrants under a point-system adapted from the Canadian and Australian models. While many elements of the Austrian system are highly developed, there is insufficient coordination among federal agencies. Austria may look to the coordinator of integration policies as a model for improving the co-ordination of policies to guide skilled labour migration.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMIGRATION LETTERSSame topicGovernment, Law, and Information ManagementFrench-language works237,207