MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211125124 · doi:10.4324/9780429344343

Rethinking Migration and Return in Southeastern Europe

2021· book· en· W4211125124 on OpenAlexaff
Eda Gemi, Anna Triandafyllidou

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This book provides an important new analytical framework for making sense of return, remigration and circular mobility, conceptualising them as different phases of a wider migration process. Using an in-depth case study of Albania and its two main destination countries, Italy and Greece, the book demonstrates that instead of being viewed as a linear path between origin and destination, migration should be seen as a segmented, or cyclical pattern that may involve several localities and more than two countries. Characterised by important previous historical, social, economic and political linkages, geographical proximity but also high migration volatility and sustained flows in either directions, Albanian migration to Italy and Greece offers an optimal case study for analysing complex return, reintegration and mobility processes. While interesting as a unique regional migration system, the lessons learned cast light on important migration and mobility dynamics that are relevant for labour migration in Europe, also from other important migrant origin countries in the EU’s neighbourhood such as for instance Morocco or the Ukraine. This rich theoretical and empirical study will be of interest to researchers within European Studies and Migration Studies, as well as providing a useful contribution to policy debates on how to govern return migration, reintegration and circular migration. The Open Access version of this book, available at http://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9780429344343, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license.  

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations29
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207