Advancement in Conceptualizing Cross-Border Daily Mobility: the Benelux Context in the European Union
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
Based on specific characteristics of mobility, the cross-border commuter status still has some ambiguities, whether in legal, geographic, economic or more generally in social or cultural terms. This paper aims at providing theoretical advancement to this specific cross-border mobility, especially through the transfer of a theoretical model using a cross-scale analysis based on two complementary concepts. The first corresponds to ‘border confirming’ and is measured at the macro level, including the economic differentials on both sides of the border. The second concept is called ‘border transcending’ and focuses on the individual level. It is based on the assessment of the psychosocial barriers that may fade as the daily practices of the border rise. This exploratory approach is tested within the European context of Benelux. The results, although they cannot be generalised due to a lack of comparable data, offer research perspectives. So far, the existence of a cross-border catchment area, tested on the Belgian cross-border commuters working in Luxembourg, is a reality for many.
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 | 0.025 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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