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
Between 1978 and 2007, more than 1.21 million Chinese went abroad for study and research, of whom only about a quarter have returned. The Chinese government's policies of attracting first-rate overseas academics back have yielded mixed results at best. This article discusses why overseas Chinese academics hesitate to return at a time when China is in desperate need of talent to turn itself into an innovation-oriented society. Common reasons relate to low salaries, problems of education for children and jobs for spouses, and problems of separation if some family members still reside abroad. More important are institutional factors. Guanxi still matters. The opportunity costs in career development are too high. In social science research, there are still taboos. Rampant misconduct has also tainted the Chinese scientific community. The article concludes that unless the research culture becomes conducive to doing first-rate work and meritocracy is rewarded, China is unlikely to witness the return migration of first-rate academics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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