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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Dublin Convention defines which EU State is responsible for the asylum application of third country nationals or stateless persons. According to this Convention, the first Member State in which an asylum seeker enters is responsible for the person’s asylum procedure. It thereby stands in gross contrast to the freedom of mobility of EU-citizens within Europe. While extensive research has focused on the attempts to build up a Common European Asylum System, mostly taking up an institutional perspective, only limited sociological research has concentrated on the perspective of refugees and on the way they are affected by the Dublin Regulation and react to it. This article explores the biographical impacts of the Dublin Convention and the reaction of concerned individuals to it through the method of biographical policy evaluation. It bases on 29 biographical interviews conducted with refugees affected by the Dublin Regulation in France. It provides an in-depth analysis of three key biographical moments regarding the Dublin Convention: the arrival in France, the process of integration and moments when refugees change the European State they live in after having sought for asylum. It shows that beyond the (intended) impact on the “choice” of the country of arrival, the Dublin Convention often impacts refugees’ integration processes in a long-lasting way.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it