MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7052504347

Destination Europe

2004· report· en· W7052504347 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · 2004
Typereport
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEuropean unionImmigrationEuropean integrationRelation (database)Perspective (graphical)Member statesEuropean studiesImmigration policy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immigration and integration have been important topics in Dutch society and \npolitics in recent years. Problems and experiences abroad have been looked at \non a few occasions, but generally this went no further than the neighbouring \ncountries, and the European dimensions of the phenomena received little or no \nattention. As far as possible, this European Outlook describes the situation \nthroughout the European Union, in both old and new member states, and also \nexamines the policy perspectives at European level. \nDemographic, economic and sociological aspects of migration and the activity \nrate of immigrants in the member states of the European Union (and occasionally \nalso Australia, Canada and the United States) are examined in this European \nOutlook. On the one hand this helps put into perspective what in recent years \nhas often been seen in the Netherlands as a specifically national problem, \nwhile at the same time shedding light on developments that could be relevant \nfor policy in the Netherlands. As in European Outlook 1 (CPB/SCP, 2003), the \nneed for and desirability of more common European policy is analysed, this time \nin relation to immigration, asylum and integration.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1790.064

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207