MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030029229 · doi:10.1002/pmj.21277

Managing Political Risks of Chinese Contracted Projects in Libya

2012· article· en· W2030029229 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProject Management Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical riskPoliticsGovernment (linguistics)BusinessRisk managementChinese peopleState (computer science)ChinaPolitical sciencePublic relationsFinanceLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The contracted project is the basic form of Sino-Libyan economic cooperation. The authors hope that Chinese constructors will learn from this case study. This article assesses the political risk for Chinese contracted projects at three levels and studies their countermeasures to this emergency and the effects of political risks on Chinese constructors in Libya. The research finds that Chinese constructors are not good at political risk management due to their traditional attitudes toward risk and the attitudes of the Chinese government toward overseas losses of Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs). However, Chinese SOEs are more experienced than private-owned enterprises in dealing with emergencies.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.676
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.326 · 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