MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Account of Immigration Studies in The United States and Canada, 1990–2004

2008· article· en· W2134777600 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSociological Quarterly · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationWarrantSociologyField (mathematics)Context (archaeology)PopulationSociological researchSociological theorySocial scienceRegional sciencePolitical scienceLawDemographyGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growth and proliferation of sociological immigration research has garnered sufficient attention to warrant a review and evaluation of the development of the field. This study took the first step by collecting detailed information about work published in the area of immigration research from major journals between 1990 and 2004. We explored three major areas: research topics addressed, theoretical frameworks employed, and population groups studied in the published literature. We compared the development of the field in the United States and Canada. The studies reveal several important patterns in the sociological publications of the United States and Canada. First, the topics studied and population groups included in the sociological publications on immigration are closely associated with the demographic and immigrant integration context of the country. Second, the publications as a whole show that in the development of immigration literature, researchers in the field are engaging in the general sociological theoretical discussion.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.266 · 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