MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394761727 · doi:10.1080/08865655.2024.2338752

In/Visible Line: The Physical and Symbolic Power of the US-Mexico Border

2024· article· en· W4394761727 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jane Lilly López

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Borderlands Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCross-Border Cooperation and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirectorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic SciencesUniversity of California Institute for Mexico and the United States
KeywordsCitizenshipSymbolic powerPower (physics)ImmigrationThe SymbolicSpouseMeaning (existential)SociologyGender studiesSymbolic capitalGeographyPolitical scienceLawPoliticsPsychologySocial scienceAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What does the US-Mexico border mean to people whose marriages are defined by – and defy – this international boundary? Through an analysis of in-depth interviews with 42 mixed-citizenship US-Mexican couples, I demonstrate the imagery and symbolisms mixed-citizenship couples evoke to make meaning of the border in their lives. I find that an individual’s initial encounter with the border, each couple’s current proximity to the border, and the non-citizen spouse’s US immigration status all informed the meanings and descriptions of the border that couples shared. For couples living in the US-Mexico Borderlands, the border looms largest as a physical structure cutting into the landscape, literally separating space and people. For couples living away from the border but who can freely travel between countries, the border/lands are mostly invisible, but also a danger to be avoided. And for couples living away from the border with no legal authorization to travel across it, the border predominantly functions as a symbolic power, dividing individuals from families and communities, past from present, reality from possibility. These different understandings of the border show the physical and symbolic power of the border to divide, while simultaneously revealing how its divisiveness can be overpowered by relationships and community.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.373 · 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
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Borderlands StudiesSame topicCross-Border Cooperation and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207