Regional identity in border regions: The difference borders make
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract One significant question for border studies is whether distance translates into closeness. That is, does proximity to state‐borders and the neighboring state constitute an interaction context in and of itself? This article relies on data from a research project that was conducted to investigate the perception of neighboring country high school students inside and outside the Danish‐German border region. The results of the research points towards an understanding of border regions as regions where several dimensions of social interaction play an important role. Although the research results provide evidence for the importance that nation‐states play in perceptual differences between borderlands and non‐borderlands, it is not the case on both sides of the Danish‐German border. Therefore, contexts other than nation‐state borders must be considered. This article argues that the perception of the neighboring country and the border region rely on specific types of cross‐border activities and associations with the neighboring country. The less important state‐borders become as markers of territoriality and control, the more other types of boundaries might become visible.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it