MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007774447 · doi:10.54648/eerr2007025

The European Union in the Eyes of Others: Towards Filling a Gap in the Literature

2007· article· en· W2007774447 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Foreign Affairs Review · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Union Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellenceEuropean unionSkepticismEuropean commissionPower (physics)Political scienceChinaCommissionPolitical economySociologyLawInternational tradeBusinessEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building on François Duchêne’s concept ‘civilian power Europe’, a growing number of scholars have asserted the EU’s distinciveness as an international actor. This has resulted in a lively debate among supporters of the thesis and sceptical scholars. What this literature has failed to investigate so far is the extent to which the EU is (or is not) regarded as a distinctive world power by other international actors. This is precisely what this article aims to do. Building on the results of a survey on The External Image of the European Union, coordinated by the author in the framework of the Network of Excellence GARNET, the article sums up the prevalent images of the EU in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Egypt, Japan, India and South Africa, and at the level of NGOs and Commission delegations.

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 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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.279 · 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