MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121084249

ITALIANS IN LONDON

2013· article· en· W2121084249 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Giuseppina Sacco

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Scientific Journal ESJ · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowball samplingImmigrationSettlement (finance)Sample (material)GeographyOrder (exchange)Regional scienceDemographic economicsEconomic geographySociologyComputer scienceEconomicsMedicineArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present research on migration to London is part of a larger project involving other similar investigations dealing with the Americas (specifically Canada and Argentina). The purpose of the overall project is the systematic study of some socio-demographic variables and the most significant factors that have helped shape the evolution of international migration in a settlement today. It also illuminates, in a diachronic development, a possible link between the determinants of European and transoceanic migrations and suggests the likely differences. The results that will be presented in this paper are those of the study of a sample obtained by a non-probability snowball sampling through interviews with 221 Italian immigrants in London. The data retrieval is achieved by administering a pre-structured questionnaire. The survey method was based on the traditional and effective optical gender related to different demographic, social and economic factors in order to find different aspects of Italian regional migration to London. We have seen that gender difference has increasingly become more helpful in modifying the traditional migration profiles of Italian regions.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Scientific Journal ESJSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207