MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023613240 · doi:10.1111/1468-2451.00262

International Migration in the UNECE Region: Patterns, Trends, Policies

2000· article· en· W2023613240 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueInternational Social Science Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationOpenness to experiencePolitical scienceHappeningSettlement (finance)Mass migrationDevelopment economicsPolitical economyImmigration policyEconomic growthGeographySociologyHistoryLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 1990s has been a turbulent decade for inter‐national migration in the UNECE region. While recorded movements have declined in recent years in Western Europe, major questions surround the frequency of unrecorded and irregular migrations which many believe are steadily increasing in number, though the evidence is problematic. Central and Eastern Europe is characterised by short‐term, short‐distance, cross‐border movement, most of which is foreconomic purposes and takes advantage of the openness of the informal sector. In North America the main thrust of immigration has long been towards permanent settlement, whereas in Europe most migration has, initially at any rate, been temporary, albeit frequently leading to settled immigrant communities. In the 1990s immigration debates in Canada and the US seem to have increasing echoes of those across the Atlantic. Especially in the US the ‘immigrationethos’ is increasingly questioned. This paper elaborates on these issues by attempting to identify what is actually happening. How important is migration? What are the patterns and trends? How significant are new and unrecordedtypes of flows? What dilemmas are presented to the managers of the UNECEmigration systems?

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.327 · 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