Japan in a Dynamic Asia: coping with the new security challenges Yoichiro Sato and Satu Limaye (eds) Lanham, Boulder, New York, Toronto, and Oxford: Lexington Books, 2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book examines Japan's post-Cold War economic and strategic relations with Asian countries (China, Taiwan, South Korea, North Korea, Russia, Southeast Asian countries, Australia, and India). It examines how and why the relations have changed and what kind of regional role Asian countries expect Japan to play. Then, it considers the future of Japan's relations with them. The book identifies important changes in Japan's post-Cold War relations with Asian countries and provides clear explanations for these changes. In the security sphere, Japan has improved its bilateral ties with Asian countries and has promoted establishment of regional security regimes, such as ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), while enhancing its military capability and strengthening its alliance with the United States. These actions were prompted by Japan's concern about changes in the security environment in Asia, particularly, the rise of China's economic and military power and, to a lesser extent, North Korea's development of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. As for its enhanced alliance with the United States, it has other roots too: U.S. military restructuring, its pressure for Japan's greater security role in Asia and beyond, and Japan's fear of abandonment by the United States. Japan is partly concerned about its stronger alliance with the United States because it increases the risk of entanglement into conflicts involving the United States, which has increased its unilateral tendency following the Cold War. Offsetting this risk is another motive behind Japan's improved military capability and its greater security bilateralism and regionalism in Asia.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".