MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914111167 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.48.3.367

Changing Measures of the Quantum of Sufficient Germanness: Access to German Citizenship of Children of German/Non-German Parentage, and Children Eligible Under Jus Soli Provisions

2017· article· en· W2914111167 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dani Kranz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanCitizenshipImmigrationLawInclusion–exclusion principlePolitical scienceSociologyInclusion (mineral)Gender studiesPoliticsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Citizenship, and in particular citizenship for children of one German, one non-German citizen parent as well as children who are eligible for citizenship via jus soli but who are of non-German-citizen parentage offer a particular rich ground to unravel the ethno-religio-socio-legalhistorical matrix of Germanness that directly feeds into the dynamics that underpin the parameters of legal inclusion and exclusion into German citizenry. The dynamics of the intersecting social and legal discourses relate to changing notions of gender, immigration, and (inter)parentage. While the legal framework of citizenship and rights of parents and children is highly dynamic, it remains reflective of the ongoing and intersecting struggles about Germanness in social, and German citizenship in legal discourses, indicating the on-going, unresolved conflicts about what intermediary spheres must be met to qualify socially as German enough to be legally eligible for German citizenship in the age of global migrations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207