MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991915572 · doi:10.24124/c677/200859

Cascadia Revisited from European Case Studies: the Socio-Political Space of Cross-Border Networks

2008· article· en· W2991915572 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Political Science Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCross-Border Cooperation and Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSketchPoliticsEuropean unionSpace (punctuation)Political scienceOrder (exchange)Regional scienceMediterranean climateEconomic geographyGeographyEconomyInternational tradeArchaeologyLawEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, I seek to analyse how cross-border spaces are constructed through the activities and strategies of established and emerging cross-border networks. In order to observe cross-border actors and public policies, I use three case studies, two in the European Union, i.e. the Rhineland Valley, also known as Upper Rhine (France-Germany-Switzerland) and the Mediterranean Euroregion (France-Spain), and one in North America, i.e. Cascadia (Canada-United States). I propose to draw our theoretical approach from a model suggested by P. Bourdieu, so that it is possible to compare a series of factors that structure these borderlands. The ultimate goal of this paper is to sketch the socio-political space of these networks in each cross-border region and eventually to suggest new research lenses for Cascadia.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.401 · 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