MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Globalization from Below: The Ranking of Global Immigrant Cities

2005· article· en· W2087967401 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 Journal of Urban and Regional Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Urban Networks and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationMetropolitan areaGlobal cityGeographyIndex (typography)Urban hierarchyGlobalizationDemographic economicsEconomic geographyPolitical scienceEconomyDemographySociologyEconomicsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immigration to major cities is an important dimension of cultural globalization, one that has been largely ignored in the global cities literature. Rates of immigration to major world cities are an important indicator of global city status and should be included in determining urban hierarchy indexes. Our study considers immigration in more than 100 metropolitan areas, using data from national censuses from more than 50 countries. We rank major cities of immigration and compare them to well‐known global city hierarchies. Using immigration data, we create an urban immigrant index. The index considers four factors of immigration: (1) the percentage of foreign‐born, (2) the total number of foreign‐born, (3) the diversity of the foreign‐born stock, and (4) whether immigrants are from neighboring countries or non‐neighboring countries. This is the first time that an international urban immigrant data set and index have been created. The study explains the empirical challenge of acquiring comparable international metropolitan data and the limits of this research. Some of the cities that rank highly in the index are commonly cited as world cities (London, New York and Frankfurt); others such as Toronto, Amsterdam and Dubai seldom appear so highly ranked. L’Immigration vers les grandes villes est une dimension importante de la mondialisation culturelle, dimension largement ignorée dans la littérature sur les villes planétaires. Les taux d’immigration vers les grandes villes mondiales sont un indicateur significatif du statut de ville planétaire et devraient être pris en compte pour établir des répertoires de hiérarchie urbaine. Cette étude, qui couvre l’immigration dans plus de cent zones métropolitaines, utilise les données de recensements nationaux provenant de plus de 50 pays. Elle classe les principales villes d’immigration et les compare aux hiérarchies de villes planétaires reconnues. A partir des données sur l’immigration, est créé un répertoire des immigrants urbains, lequel se réfère à quatre facteurs d’immigration: (1) le pourcentage néà l’étranger, (2) l’effectif total néà l’étranger, (3) la diversité de la population née à l’étranger et (4) si les migrants viennent de pays voisins ou non. C’est la première fois qu’un fichier de données et un répertoire d’immigrants urbains internationaux sont créés. L’étude expose le défi empirique pour récupérer des données métropolitaines internationales comparables, ainsi que les limites de cette recherche. Certaines des villes placées en tête du répertoire sont fréquemment citées comme villes mondiales (Londres, New York et Frankfort), d’autres comme Toronto, Amsterdam et Dubaï apparaissent rarement à ce niveau de classement.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.325 · 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