MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021199081 · doi:10.1080/08865655.2004.9695615

Sovereign survival: Borders as issues

2004· article· en· W2021199081 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Allan K. McDougall, Lisa Valentine

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Borderlands Studies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHegemonyAgency (philosophy)State (computer science)Relevance (law)SovereigntyLiminalityLaw and economicsPower (physics)Political sciencePolitical economySociologySovereign stateLawPoliticsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Revisiting the relevance of state borders in a changing world, this paper focuses on the complexities of the intersection of the hegemonic character of the state and its manifestations in issues at the border. Three types of border conflict are presented in this case study: trade and the construction of issues across the Canada‐U.S. border, the indirect impact of that state border on social services and social life in the area, and the decreasing significance of statist standards as one approaches its borders. The study uses a typical decision of a quasi judicial agency, the National Transportation Agency, to illustrate the hegemonic practice embedded in the normal practice of statist structures. It concludes with the paradox that the rule of law is crucial to control the exercise of public power and yet the application of legal principles reinforces the ascendancy of hegemonic forces. The border as the hinterland of the state is a liminal zone where these dynamics are especially 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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.049
Scholarly communication0.0130.014
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Borderlands StudiesSame topicPolitical Systems and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207