MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561486547 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.38.2.215

How Many Melting Pots? Intermarriage, Pan ethnicity, and the Black/Non-Black Divide In the United States

2007· article· en· W2561486547 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vincent Kang Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupCensusDemographyGeographyMelting potGender studiesSociologyPopulationAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study uses the 1 in 6 Long Form Sample of the 1990 Decennial United States Census to describe intermarriage patterns for a detailed set of racial and ethnic groups and determine whether the notions of assimilation, panethnicity, and a Black/non-Black divide describe racial and ethnic differentiation in the United States. Asian groups exhibit panethnicity in their intermarriage choices, tending to intermarry with members of other Asian groups. Latino groups fit both assimilation and panethnicity, with some Latino groups tending to intermarry with Whites and others showing an affinity for intermarriage with other Latinos. Intermarriage patterns also reveal a deep divide between Blacks and non-Blacks.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations21
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation StudiesFrench-language works237,207