A “border for the people"? Narratives on changing eastern borders in Finland and Austria
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 The fall of the Iron Curtain and the border regime of the European Union have changed perceptions of borders. This study compares border narratives on two Eastern borders in Austria and Finland in order to find out how such narratives picture the changing functions of the borders. The qualitative data gathered from interviews with border policy actors in both countries reveals that the shared narrative of the Iron Curtain is in the process of being substituted by a narrative which suggests a “border for the people”, a border managed according to the border‐crosser's demands. However, this emphasis on mobility depends on the section of the border the interviewee focuses on. Land borders are connected with the classical security and control functions of borders to stop unwanted border crossings. Yet, the border crossing points are meant to enable and encourage wanted flows. The same border can have very different functions, depending on where the observer is focusing. Analytically, those differing foci have to be distinguished in order to better interpret border narratives.1
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 | 0.000 |
| 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