MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240692755 · doi:10.22215/rera.v2i2.169

Externalities of the EU Immigration and Asylum Policy: The Case of Ukraine

2006· article· en· W4240692755 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lyubov Zhyznomirska

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European and Russian Affairs · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Union Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEuropean unionOrder (exchange)ImmigrationEconomic JusticeExternalitySecurity policyFreedom of movementBorder SecurityIrregular migrationPolitical scienceBusinessEu countriesInternational tradeIllegal immigrantsEconomic policyEconomicsLawComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the 1990s, the EU has been gradually transferring to neighbouring countries parts of the burden of securing its internal order from illegal migrants, terrorists, criminal groups and other “threats.” It has done so using policy transfers and foreign relations mechanisms. The European Union, seeking to create an “area of freedom, security, and justice” in the region, exports the burden of migration management to its neighbouring countries and thus creates security threats – if not real then perceived – for these countries. The case of Ukraine demonstrates that EU policies of shifting the burden of international migration management to its neighbours can destabilize the societal security of countries that lack the experience and instruments to effectively deal with migration. Rather than shifting the burden of responsibility to the neighbouring states, the EU should prioritize co-operation and assistance to expand the area of freedom, justice and security on the European continent.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.751

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European and Russian AffairsSame topicEuropean Union Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207