Introduction: Europe - a continent of immigration? / Europe - un continent d’immigration ? : legal challenges in the construction of European migration policy / défis juridiques dans la construction de la Politique européenne de migration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the past decade the European Union has developed the foundations of a common migration policy by harmonising national immigration and asylum laws and introducing new instruments. Despite some remarkable achievements European policy-makers have struggled to build a conceptual basis for migration policy. The Stockholm Program on the future of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice underlines the need for continued critical reflection about the conceptual foundations and legal challenges of European migration law. This collection of essays by young and promising European lawyers from different national and academic backgrounds supports an interdisciplinary approach to the analysis of European migration law, reflecting the political, economic and sociological context of legal rules governing the international movement of people. Since European migration law is a relatively new area of European law-making, young scholars are in a particularly good position to enhance our understanding of recent developments in and future challenges of the construction of European migration law. This bilingual volume comprises a selection of the revised versions of papers first presented at the 7th International Workshop for Young Scholars (WISH) / 7eme Rencontre Internationale des Jeunes Chercheurs (RIJC). It was held at Humboldt University in Berlin on 14 15 November 2008 on the theme ‘Europe – a Continent of Immigration?’ / ‘Europe : un continent d’immigration ?’. It was organised by the European Law Journal, together with the Walter-Hallstein-Institute for European Constitution Law at Humboldt University and the Centre d’Etudes et de Recherches Internationales et Communautaires (CERIC - CNRS - UMR 6201) of the Universite Paul Cezanne Aix-Marseille III. WISH/RIJC is an annual conference which seeks to bring together the most promising young scholars in specific fields of European law from universities of the EU Member States, candidate countries, and other countries in North and South America, the Middle East, Africa or Asia, including the United States, Canada, and China. Its objective is to identify and discuss themes which are likely to be the most significant topics of research in the field of European law in the first half of the 21st century.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Theoretical or conceptual | medium |
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".