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
For many years, China's government worried about the ‘brain drain’. But beginning in 1992, China began to encourage students settled abroad to return for short visits and en-gage in various programmes on the Chinese mainland. Then, in 2001, the government adopted a new policy, encouraging overseas mainlanders to contribute to China's modernisation, even if they stayed abroad, and outlining various ways they could help China. This policy mirrors the strategies of other countries who encourage ‘brain circulation’ and develop a ‘diaspora option’ in order to overcome the loss of talented people. But what forms does this assistance take? Why do people contribute to China's modernisation while remaining abroad? What are the characteristics of those who ‘serve China’, as compared to those who do not? We employ data from a survey in Silicon Valley, as well as two Web-based surveys carried out in Canada and the US with mainland Chinese academics to answer these questions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| 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 it