MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402728653 · doi:10.1080/01419870.2024.2404481

Categories as learning practice: navigating contested belonging along transatlantic mobile trajectories

2024· article· en· W4402728653 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Heike Drotbohm

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnic and Racial Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJohannes Gutenberg-Universität MainzMax-Planck-Institut zur Erforschung Multireligiöser und Multiethnischer GesellschaftenDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsSociologyPolitical scienceGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although mobility-related categorization processes are central to migration studies, the ways that mobile populations understand, adapt, or contest them remain understudied. To trace such interpretations across both space and time, this paper explores a migrant trajectory that first crossed national borders within Africa before continuing to Brazil and later proceeding to Canada. The research combines ethnographic insights with the autobiographic reflections of one protagonist, whose perspectives and experiences move between different places, countries, institutions, people, and critical events. Following that individual’s learning processes, this article traces which categories were meaningful in the context of origin, how these changed in the interaction with different authorities, how transformative events played into valorizations, and which signs of categorical dissolution were recognizable during these trajectories. A biographical learning perspective sees not only the aspirations and the ideals but also the pragmatism and skepticism around the impact of mobility-related categories change along such journeys.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.042
Scholarly communication0.0120.012
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.379 · 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthnic and Racial StudiesSame topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207