MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905780274 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1722334116

Estimation of emigration, return migration, and transit migration between all pairs of countries

2018· article· en· W2905780274 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jonathan J. Azose, Adrian E. Raftery

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentCenter for Advanced Study, University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignCenter for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford UniversityNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsEmigrationEstimationHuman migrationQuarter (Canadian coin)EconometricsGeographyEconomicsPopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a method for estimating migration flows between all pairs of countries that allows for decomposition of migration into emigration, return, and transit components. Current state-of-the-art estimates of bilateral migration flows rely on the assumption that the number of global migrants is as small as possible. We relax this assumption, producing complete estimates of all between-country migration flows with genuine estimates of total global migration. We find that the total number of individuals migrating internationally has oscillated between 1.13 and 1.29% of the global population per 5-year period since 1990. Return migration and transit migration are big parts of total migration; roughly one of four migration events is a return to an individual's country of birth. In the most recent time period, we estimate particularly large return migration flows from the United States to Central and South America and from the Persian Gulf to south Asia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations169
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207