MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

“Cocksparrow Diplomacy”: Percy Spender, The Colombo Plan And Commonwealth Relations

2008· article· en· W2054399049 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ademola Adeleke

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Politics & History · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAustralian History and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiplomacyCommonwealthPlan (archaeology)Political scienceHistoryLawArchaeologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Percy Spender, the Australian Foreign Minister in 1950, played a critical role in the establishment of the Colombo Plan. The programme was proposed by Commonwealth ministers in Colombo, Sri Lanka, in January 1950. In May, Spender hosted the first meeting of the Consultative Committee to work out the modalities for the aid programme. Using Canadian and British sources, the article re‐examines Spender's diplomacy at the Sydney conference. It demonstrates why his conduct elicited such strong condemnation from his fellow ministers and almost precipitated a crisis in Commonwealth relations. It argues that Spender antagonised Commonwealth ministers unnecessarily with his tactics without achieving the objectives he had set for himself. His diplomacy did not advance his vision of the aid programme; instead, the British vision of the Colombo Plan prevailed in Sydney.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.214 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of Politics & HistorySame topicAustralian History and SocietyFrench-language works237,207