Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article analyses the peculiarities of the relation between three concepts: ‘diaspora’, ‘gender’ and ‘communication’ in the case of women of Romanian ethnic origin living in Canada. Diasporas and diasporic experiences, even in their apparently more traditionalist variants, should not be dismissed simplistically as backward-looking, as they are almost invariably constituting new transnational spaces of experience that are complexly interfacing with the experiential frameworks that both countries of settlement and purported countries of origin represent. Diasporas are located in the midst of diverse circulations. Borrowing Appadurai’s notions (1996), it can be argued that ‘diaspora is the intersection point of ethno-scapes, finance-scapes, ideo-scapes, techno-scapes and media-scapes’ (1996). The article assumes that the interaction between gender, social identity and communication can be a new way of understanding the peculiarities of diaspora in the modern age. The article favours a qualitative research methodology. On the basis of ‘methods’ triangulation’ principle and for validity reasons, two main methods of data collection will be used: the discourse analysis of the online journals (blogs) written by Romanian women and the semi-structured interviews with a sample of Romanian women from the Canadian diaspora. Communication, either as ‘a bridge to homeland’, or as ‘a link between the diaspora communities in local, national and transnational levels’ is contributing to the creation of symbolic community spaces in which identities can be reconstructed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".