MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011518516 · doi:10.1080/08865655.2002.9695581

Demand and supply of Mexican cross‐border workers

2002· article· en· W2011518516 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Borderlands Studies · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemand sideSupply sideWork (physics)EconomicsSupply and demandLabour economicsPower (physics)Explanatory powerMarket economyEconomyEngineeringMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Transmigration is defined as daily cross border employment of people who reside on the Mexican side and work in a nearby place inside the United States. In this border ambience, transmigration is considered as the expression of a transborder labor market. In this research, we show that transmigration is not part of a single cross‐border labor market, rather transmigrants participate in two labor markets, one on each side of the border. The general conclusion is that transmigration is fueled by the structural differences (expressed here by wages) between Mexico and the United States and that Mexican labor supply and the American demand have little explanatory power. On the supply side, lack of documents to work legally in the United States is not a restriction to transmigration. On the demand side, growth of the American's border local economy has little effect on the increase of transmigration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.558
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.341 · 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