MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Non-Independent Territories of the Caribbean and Pacific: Continuity or Change?

2014· book· en· W1569134126 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peter Clegg

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Affairs · 2014
Typebook
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLaw, logistics, and international trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndependence (probability theory)ColonialismMetropolitan areaPower (physics)Small Island Developing StatesPolitical scienceCorporate governanceEmpireCaribbean regionVulnerability (computing)Political economyGeographyEconomyDevelopment economicsSociologyLatin AmericansLawClimate changeEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By the end of the 20th century the once great modern European empires had gone - well, almost! Today, scattered around the world, there are small territories, remnants of empire that for one reason and another have eschewed independence and retain links of various kinds with the former imperial power. This edited collection focuses primarily on those territories in the Caribbean and Pacific which retain these 'colonial' ties. The issues affecting them such as constitutional reform, the maintenance of good governance, economic development, and the risks of economic vulnerability are important concerns for all territories both independent and non-independent. However, the ways in which these issues are addressed are somewhat different in small sub-national jurisdictions because of the particular regimes in place and the tensions inherent between the territories and their respective metropoles. The book brings together academics, policy-makers, constitutional lawyers, and civil servants to provide an insight into the complexities, contradictions, challenges and opportunities that help to define the non-independent territories of the Caribbean and Pacific, and their long-standing but sometimes awkward ties with their metropolitan powers.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.676
Threshold uncertainty score0.759

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePacific AffairsSame topicLaw, logistics, and international tradeFrench-language works237,207