Structured regionalism in the Asia‐Pacific: Slow but sure progress
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
Abstract: Notwithstanding the existence of considerable intra‐regional trade, the Asia‐Pacific region was slow to catch onto the concept and phenomenon of regionalism. Not many regional integration arrangements were created in the region and the ones that were created did not go far. Over the preceding three‐and‐a‐half decades, the high performing Asian economies adopted outward‐oriented strategies, promoting brisk trade expansion trade and foreign investment. Asia‐Pacific regionalism was essentially market‐led and uninstitutionalised. Regional production networks were the consequence of market‐led economic dynamics in the region. Large corporations, including transnationals, contributed to the growth of a pan‐Asian industrialisation process and trade expansion. This scenario underwent a transformation in the 1990s, particularly during the Asian crisis of 1997–98. Conscious economic and monetary co‐operation with institutional support increased considerably. Asia‐Pacific economies are more committed to regionalism – both economically and institutionally – now than ever before.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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