Toward a Cosmopolitan and Inclusive European Identity? Negotiating Immigrants’ Inclusion and Exclusion in the New Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolving European identity has captured the imagination of researchers and the wider public alike. It denotes the prospect of a viable and stable social and political community beyond the nation-state. Yet, as the social preconditions for making such a transnational community become feasible, a European collective identity has become the subject of competing political projections and normative expectations. Klaus Eder (2001; 2004) has repeatedly shed light on how the concept of collective identity suffers from a lack of analytical rigor and from burgeoning normative claims. This also holds true for the link between an emerging European identity and the integration of migrants into the fabric of European societies: one of the key normative expectations concerning an emerging European identity and transnational citizenship regime is that they are cosmopolitan in nature and, at least to a large degree, exempt from the exclusionary underpinnings of traditional national identities (Eder and Giesen 2000). A European identity is widely expected to provide an environment in which traditional modes of social closure and discrimination against the allegedly inferior ‘other’ become less and less acceptable as a social and political practice. As compared to national identities the European one is inherently defined by its lack of cultural or ethnic foundation and thus structurally prepared to deal with Europe’s internal cultural, ethnic, and religious diversity (Dell’Olio 2005; Dietz 2004). These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".