International Research Infrastructure and the Impact of Export Control Regulations
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
Introduction Administrators (SRA) celebrates its 40th anniversary. Originally founded as a North American organization, with four sections in the United States and one in Canada, SRA has grown into a truly international society. To reflect its growing global membership, SRA added the term International to its name in 2000. Members today come from nearly every part of the world (Table 1). As SRA has increased its international membership and diversity of research management interests, it has remained dedicated to its mission of training and career development for research managers and administrators through formal educational offerings, exchange of best practices and continual networking among members The face of research, too, has changed over the years. Seldom is research confined to a single team working at one laboratory, As research has become more complex, sub-specialties have developed in scientific disciplines, and special expertise in using complex research procedures and instrumentation is critically important. Not every institution can afford the increasing cost of highly sophisticated instrumentation, such as nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (which can reach hundreds of thousands of dollars, even before maintenance and personnel costs), and funding sources are not able to pay such costs. This has led to the growth of multidisciplinary, collaborative research that is no longer confined to a single laboratory or nation, but involves multiple institutions internationally. As the complexity and globalization of research have grown, regulations governing research also have become more complex. Institutions in the United States and elsewhere have learned to deal with the regulatory and policy differences attendant with the globalization of research. To meet the needs of universities and other organizations engaged in research, SRA has provided training and professional development opportunities to improve the research management infrastructure of institutions throughout the world. It has been said that the path to economic and human development in a global knowledge economy is through increased education. Organizations such as the U.S. Civilian Research and Development Foundation (CRDF), the Carnegie Corporation, and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation support efforts to increase the capacity for higher education and research in Africa, states of the former Soviet Union, and elsewhere. These groups support the research efforts, complex equipment, and the development of research management infrastructure at universities and other organizations needed for international collaborations. Other U.S.-based foundations, such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Ford Foundation, have invested heavily in developing local solutions to local and global problems through research. Despite the continued efforts of these groups and others to support research organizations and researchers, United States Export Control Regulations can be a barrier to collaborations between scientists in the U.S. and around the world. Understanding these restrictions is critical if we are to engage in global research. This article describes United States Export Control Regulations and the needs of international researchers for access to training, the latest technologies, and the infrastructure support of their home institutions. Examples of the needs of universities in Africa, Russia, and states of the former Soviet Union are presented. An appropriate balance must exist among the U.S. need for national security, support for educational advances in other countries, and advances in research that can only be achieved through international collaborations. An Overview of Export Control Laws and Regulations Current U.S. export laws control dissemination of a wide range of technologies in a way that may have an adverse impact on research and the ability of international researchers to perform competitively. …
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 | 0.007 | 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 it