MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7160432993 · doi:10.7202/1124904ar

Nommer le transit, fabriquer l’impasse

2025· article· fr· W7160432993 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Adriana Costa Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueLien social et Politiques · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Identity, and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationEthnographyWork (physics)Dematerialization (economics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis 2017, le durcissement des politiques migratoires européennes a favorisé l’émergence à Bruxelles de la catégorie des « transmigrant·es » : une population hétérogène, vulnérabilisée par l’errance et exclue des dispositifs institutionnels d’accueil. Fondé sur une enquête ethnographique menée sur le terrain bruxellois, cet article examine la manière dont les politiques migratoires façonnent la notion de transit, imposant aux individus des formes de mobilité contrainte. Nous retraçons l’émergence de cette catégorie migratoire en Belgique, ainsi que les parcours qu’elle englobe en Europe. Cette analyse interroge la catégorie en dévoilant les tensions qui traversent les discours qui la construisent : d’une part l’agentivité perçue comme abusive, et d’autre part, les contraintes étatiques, qui imposent le blocage tout comme le déplacement forcé. Plus qu’une exception logée dans les interstices des politiques migratoires, le transit devient à la fois un produit et un outil de dissuasion et un élément structurant de la réaffirmation de son système de frontières. Loin d’être une problématique exclusive à Bruxelles, elle invite à porter un regard sur la circulation de catégories de migration entre politiques européennes et contextes locaux, où s’imbriquent répression et hospitalité.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLien social et PolitiquesSame topicMigration, Identity, and HealthFrench-language works237,207