Bibliographic record
Abstract
As young Singaporeans are evaluating their obligations towards their parents at home, the state of Singapore is implementing policies to entrench long-term connection between overseas Singaporean students and their families by using financial support to guide overseas Singaporean student societies. These methods reach far beyond Singapore’s borders and involve a combination of online and offline communities of practice that bring young overseas Singaporeans closer together by setting social boundaries across multiple media. Young Singaporeans learn about studying overseas through online communities, and Singaporean societies seek to control that form of communication. In this paper, the author describes the worldwide state-funded and student-run Singaporean societies and how they seek to govern overseas students’ relationships with family at home using methods such as social media, finances, and parties. Drawing from ethnographic and online methods of inquiry over three months in 2015, this article explores how students experienced Singaporean societies as a tool to access social and financial resources, which set boundaries for them when reevaluating their responsibilities at home while they live abroad. The author looks at the critical language that is present in an online community of young Singaporeans and shows how Singaporean societies limit opportunities for criticism.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".