MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086499632 · doi:10.1080/08865655.2014.938968

(Un)Familiarity? Labor Related Cross-Border Mobility in Sønderjylland/Schleswig Since Denmark Joined the EC in 1973

2014· article· en· W2086499632 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Martin Klatt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Borderlands Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCross-Border Cooperation and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceEconomic historyDemographic economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents an analysis of recent developments in labor-related mobility (cross-border commuting) in the Danish–German border region of Sønderjylland-Schleswig. The region had an integrated labor market, until today's German–Danish border was drawn in 1920, dividing the historic Duchy of Schleswig. Until Denmark joined the EC in 1973, the Danish–German border was practically closed to labor-related mobility. Since then, commuting remained at very low levels until the mid-2000s, even though unemployment figures north and south of the border developed unevenly, and two national minorities had strong social and cultural ties across the border. From about 2005–2008 there was a drastic increase in commuting from Germany to Denmark, while commuting in the other direction has remained at a very low level. Here, the article comes up with some explanations for this development using the concept of (Un)Familiarity as developed by Bas Spierings and Martin van der Velde.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.378 · 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

Citations23
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Borderlands StudiesSame topicCross-Border Cooperation and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207