MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7036102363

Binnenstebuitenlanders. Het Nederlandse migratiebeleid ten aanzien van Surinaamse rijksgenoten, 1965-1980

2017· other· nl· W7036102363 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUtrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) · 2017
Typeother
Languagenl
FieldEnergy
TopicIron oxide chemistry and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelephone surveyQuarter (Canadian coin)Policy making
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In deze scriptie wordt de marginalisatie van migrantengroepen ten gevolge van migratiebeleid geanalyseerd. Als casus voor deze analyse is gekeken naar de Surinaamse migratie naar Nederland in de jaren '60 en '70 van de twintigste eeuw. Voor de Surinaamse migranten golden de betere onderwijs- en arbeidsperspectieven in Nederland als traditionele drijfveren, maar de migratie kreeg in aanloop naar de onafhankelijkheid van Suriname in 1975 ook een politiek karakter. Het Statuut van het Koninkrijk in 1954 maakte Surinamers tot Nederlandse burgers, waardoor het voor de Nederlandse overheid onmogelijk was om deze ongewenste immigratie een halt toe te roepen. Het bewerkstelligen van de Surinaamse onafhankelijkheid stond ten dienste van deze migratiestop. Aan de hand van huisvesting, arbeid, en educatie wordt er ingegaan op de discrepanties en overeenkomsten tussen de perspectieven van de Nederlandse overheid en de Surinaamse migranten. Geconcludeerd wordt dat de halsstarrige houding van de overheid wel degelijk een marginaliserende werking had op de positie van deze migranten in de Nederlandse samenleving, maar dat de migranten dit proces ook ten dele zélf in de hand werkten.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUtrecht University Repository (Utrecht University)Same topicIron oxide chemistry and applicationsFrench-language works237,207