Enfrentando las políticas de integración y de ciudadanía: migrantes latinoamericanos en la ciudad europea Facing Integration and Citizenship Policies: Latin American Migrants in the European City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RESUMEN En las ultimas dos decadas y con el llamado “fra-caso del multiculturalismo” emerge un debate importante sobre la formulacion de las politicas de integracion de los inmigrantes en Europa. Aunque estas politicas deben apuntar a fortalecer la participacion de los inmigrantes en todos los ambitos de la sociedad y a favorecer procesos in-terculturales, en la practica los migrantes deben asumir la entera responsabilidad de su integra-cion. Considerando el contexto internacional economico y politico actual, Europa enfatiza su rechazo a la migracion no occidental y sus politi-cas tienden a reforzar las medidas de control y el establecimiento de criterios estrictos de seleccion. Como ilustra el caso de la comunidad latinoame -ricana, la eficacia de las politicas de integracion es limitada y los inmigrantes estan participando * Docente e Investigadora de la Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas, (Colom -bia). Doctora en Ciencias Politicas y Sociales, Universidad de Leiden, Holanda. Master en Ciencias Politicas, Universidad de Montreal, Canada. Abogada, Universidad Externado de Colombia. Filosofa, Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Sus lineas de investigacion son: migraciones internacionales, teoria, politica y cultura, estudios urbanos, politica de la diver -sidad y relaciones interetnicas. Entre sus ultimas publicaciones destacan: “Inmigracion, multiculturalidad y politicas de integracion en Europa: colombianos en Amsterdam, Londres y Madrid” (2012); “Territorialidades Civicas: espacio publico y cultura urbana en Bogota” (2008); “La inmigracion y el devenir de las sociedades multiculturales: perspectivas politicas y teoricas” (2008). Correo electronico: maria.pardo @uexternado.edu.co
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".