What influences the direction and magnitude of Asian student mobility? Macro data analysis based on life planning model
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presented study aims to explore the factors that influence Asian student mobility using a life planning model, which focuses on students’ lifelong planning and restricting factors in decision making. As a result of macro data analysis of student mobility from six Asian source countries (China, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, India, and Nepal) to eight major destinations (USA, the UK, Australia, Germany, France, Canada, China, and Japan) from 1999 to 2017, the income gap between source country and destination country shows a negative correlation with student mobility, which supports the hypothesis that a decrease in budgetary constraints promotes study abroad. This finding is contrary to the assumption of the traditional push-and-pull model. This may be explained by the expansion of a middle-class population who are eager to send their children abroad whenever the budgetary constraint is lifted. Bilateral trade shows a positive correlation, which supports the hypothesis that prospect of employment, associated with economic connectedness, promotes study 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it