MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286210353 · doi:10.1080/08865655.2022.2101141

Inward Border: The Multiscalar Production of Borders Amid the COVID-19 Epidemic Prevention and Control on China’s Southwest Border

2022· article· en· W4286210353 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xuefeng Hou, Shanshan Huang, Jianzao Ren

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Borderlands Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChina's Socioeconomic Reforms and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Social Science Fund of China
KeywordsChinaDominance (genetics)GeographyEconomyEconomic geographyEconomicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Border studies conducted so far have always focused on areas close to or outside the border of a country and rarely on the dynamic process of its inward border. The inward border represents the construction or deconstruction of a country’s internal borders by different agents at different scales. As the city with the highest population mobility on China’s southeast border, Ruili was considered for analyzing China’s inward border amid its border epidemic containment. The analysis revealed that the production of Ruili’s inward border demonstrated distinct multiscalar characteristics. First, an isolated zone was formed owing to the enhanced materialization of Ruili’s border and the interruption in Ruili’s normal contact with the outside world; a contact zone was also created owing to the support provided by the central government to Ruili. Second, border residents’ participation broke the dominance of border authorities in border control. Therefore, Ruili’s border became more resilient with the stable coexistence of isolation and contact.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.362
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Borderlands StudiesSame topicChina's Socioeconomic Reforms and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207