MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1856910135 · doi:10.4000/remi.7143

Les pratiques économiques des entrepreneurs issus de l'immigration chinoise. Le cas de Paris, Bruxelles et Montréal

2015· article· fr· W1856910135 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexander Nicholls

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue européenne de migrations internationales · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article explore les liens économiques établis par les entrepreneurs issus de l'immigration chinoise. Il se base sur une analyse qualitative de soixante entretiens. Les personnes interrogées sont des Chinois en provenance de divers pays (République populaire de Chine, Taïwan, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodge, Thaïlande, Indonésie, Madagascar), établis dans les villes de Paris, Bruxelles et Montréal. Les données empiriques ici présentées indiquent que le phénomène est complexe et contextuel, et que les pratiques en matière d'échanges économiques entre les entreprises sont variées. L'article en étudie l'aspect ethnique, selon les caractéristiques du patron et la ville d'implantation, ainsi que leur évolution dans le temps. La recherche conclut à l'importance du facteur générationnel dans la pratique du commerce et à la part croissante des échanges transnationaux, en particulier en direction de la Chine. Corollairement, les échanges locaux entre entreprises chinoises immigrées s'affaiblissent. Loin du stéréotype d'immuabilité qui leur est parfois attribué, les entrepreneurs chinois immigrés font preuve d'adaptation aux contextes local, national et transnational.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue européenne de migrations internationalesSame topicMigration, Ethnicity, and EconomyFrench-language works237,207