MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995033824 · doi:10.1177/0921374013498136

Criminal networks, unfortunate circumstances, or migratory projects? Researching sex trafficking from Eastern Europe

2013· article· en· W1995033824 on OpenAlexaff
Darja Davydova

Bibliographic record

VenueCultural Dynamics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationEuropean unionPoliticsCriminologySex workIdentity (music)Diversity (politics)Political scienceThe SymbolicSex traffickingVulnerability (computing)Political economySociologyLawInternational tradeComputer securityHuman traffickingPsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eastern Europe constitutes a peripheral space of the European Union, in which political and symbolic belonging of the nations is constantly questioned. As the migration of Eastern Europeans challenges and redefines geographical and symbolic borders, sex trafficking emerges as a politicized issue related to the construction of the European identity and the surveillance of the borders. The research on sex trafficking is frequently employed by policy-makers in order to justify the increasing control of migration over the Eastern border. In this article, I explore the diversity of methodological approaches in recent research on migration for sex work from Eastern Europe and discuss its implications for maintaining physical and symbolic Eastern border of the European Union. I distinguish between different perspectives undertaken by researchers and demonstrate the relation between conceptualization of the problem of sex trafficking, methodological approaches, and the way Eastern Europe is described in research projects.

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)0.005
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.014
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations26
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCultural DynamicsSame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207