MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335151434 · doi:10.5509/2005783443

As China Meets the Southern Sea Frontier: Ocean Identity in the Making, 1902-1937

2005· article· en· W2335151434 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Affairs · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaArchipelagoGeographyFrontierOceanographyArchaeologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The South China Sea, currently traversed by more than half of the world's supertankers, is a three-million-square-kilometre semi-enclosed sea scattered with barren islands and reefs, some of them partly submerged at high tide. There is no consensus as to exactly how many features are involved or the extent of the archipelagos, but it can be said that the area hosts four clusters: the Macclesfield Bank (claimed by China and Taiwan, with some parts also claimed by the Philippines); the Pratas Islands (claimed by China and Taiwan and occupied by the latter); the Paracel Islands (claimed by China, Taiwan and Vietnam but occupied by China since 1974); and the Spratly Islands (claimed entirely or partly by China, Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei.) Since two armed skirmishes occurred in 1974 and 1988 between Vietnam-

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.006

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.232 · 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