Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seen positively, transnationalism enriches the cultural, linguistic and religious diversity of many countries and enhances the exchange of goods and services in the increasingly globalized economy. Seen negatively, transnationalism creates disunity in terms of introducing new ethnic, linguistic and religious traditions in developed countries, and poses risks to security and national well being. This paper examines citizenship conceptions, policies and practices directed towards transnational migrants within the European Union, the United States, and Canada. D’un point de vue positif, le transnationalisme enrichit la diversité culturelle, linguistique et religieuse de plusieurs pays et il accroît les échanges de produits et services dans une économie de plus en plus mondialisée. D’un point de vue négatif, le transnationalisme crée des pertes d’unité par l’introduction de nouvelles traditions ethniques, linguistiques et religieuses dans les pays développés, de même qu’il pose des risques à la sécurité et au bien-être national. Cet article examine les conceptions de la citoyenneté, les politiques et les pratiques à l’égard des migrants transnationaux dans l’Union européenne, aux États-Unis et au Canada.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".