Using Logistic Regression Modeling to Analyze Barriers and Facilitators to Social Integration of Foreign Immigrants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to differences in lifestyle, cultural capital and social support, foreign immigrants often have difficulty integrating into the ecology of their native communities and are limited in their space for development.To solve this difficulty, this paper applies the principle of regularization to obtain a logistic regression model by categorizing the factors affecting the social integration of foreign immigrants.The algorithms of log-likelihood function and negative Hessian matrix are used to optimize the parameters of the model, construct the multivariate logistic regression model based on the social integration of foreign immigrants, and analyze the regression results among various factors.The success rate of foreign immigrants' local integration is higher when the immigration-related system is more perfect, the foreign immigrants' cultural identification with the local area is higher, the cognitive deviation between foreign immigrants and locals is smaller, and the community integration structure is more appropriate.The highest correlation between the factors affecting the social integration of foreign immigrants is the formation of ethnic networks that are not embedded in the community by foreign immigrants who "embrace the group", and the cognitive bias of local residents towards foreign immigrants, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9214, and the correlation coefficients of the rest of the indicators are less than 0.9.This paper classifies the migrants into "migrants of work nature" and "migrants of employment nature" in accordance with the purpose of their migratory activities.In this paper, according to the purpose of migration, migrants are classified into four categories: "work migration, study migration, investment migration and shelter migration", and the results of the multivariate logistic regression analysis are credible.
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 | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".