Bibliographic record
Abstract
History of migration has recently focussed less on socio-economic preconditions or macro structures but on the agency of those involved in migratory processes. Thereby migrants have become a focus for research, while the people who enabled their movement have received not the same attention. By analysing a family network of migration agents spread-out in various parts of the Habsburg Empire, this paper brings together the micro and macro perspectives of overseas migration from and via Central Europe. The paper investigates the years preceding the First World War when emigration from Austria-Hungary and those involved became the object of scandal. The imperial War Ministry and several newspapers attacked a newcomer to the transatlantic migration business, the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, and several hundred migration agents for illegally enhancing the emigration of Austro-Hungarian men who had not yet fulfilled their military service. The scholarly investigation of this scandal shows, however, that while emigration services might indeed have operated on the margins of legality, the interests of several other actors were at stake. Based on a close reading of Habsburg and British newspapers as well as administrative and judiciary documents from Vienna, L’viv and Chernivtsi archives, this paper sketches out the different layers of an entangled history. These entanglements included divergent interests and corruption among ministries in Austria-Hungary, political animosities in the Habsburg province of Galicia, competing international steamship trusts, settlement policies for Canada’s sparsely populated territories, and diplomatic and public resentment in the British Empire over the alleged unfair treatment of a Canadian company abroad.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".