MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319968920 · doi:10.1080/00207659.2023.2173854

A Virus That Knew Borders. COVID-19 Patients Zero Worldwide and the Strength of Transnationalism

2023· article· en· W4319968920 on OpenAlexaff
Romain Lecler

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sociology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransnationalismPandemicChinaGlobalizationMobilitiesCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Development economicsPolitical scienceTourismDemographic economicsSociologyEconomic geographyEconomic growthGeographyEconomicsSocial scienceLawMedicinePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In less than 3 months in 2020, COVID-19 spread to more than 200 countries and turned into a global pandemic that affected all world regions. Far from being a “post-Westphalian” virus that knew no borders, COVID-19 remained embedded in unequal patterns of international mobilities. To substantiate this claim, I devised an original methodology inspired by “thing-following studies”. A dataset was created on all patients zero worldwide (n = 287) in the 206 countries where they were identified. Empirically, my findings dismantle some myth about the international spread of COVID-19. First, the data put Europe – rather than China – at the core of the pandemic: four Western European countries exported half of all patients zero to entire regions like South America or Africa, reflecting postcolonial legacies. Second, twothirds were in fact nationals who brought back the virus to their own country. Third, a majority were involved in cross-border activities relating to business, family, religion or education, rather than tourism – most of them middle-aged men. Theoretically, this demonstrates the strength of transnational activities among international mobilities. Transnationalism appears as a crucial – though deeply unequal – infrastructure of our current globalization.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of SociologySame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207