MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2752953877 · doi:10.1177/0974928417716211

India–Canada Relations: The Nuclear Energy Aspect

2017· article· en· W2752953877 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stuti Banerjee

Bibliographic record

VenueIndia Quarterly A Journal of International Affairs · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Environmental Law and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipPoliticsPolitical scienceScope (computer science)Nuclear technologyNuclear weaponCivil societyPolitical economyDevelopment economicsInternational tradeNuclear powerEconomic growthEconomyBusinessEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The India–Canada relationship has witnessed a number of highs and lows despite the two nations sharing common political views. This is perhaps best seen in the civil nuclear cooperation shared between the two. It is interesting to note that the relation between the two nations fractured twice due to nuclear issues in the past; today, nuclear cooperation is an important pillar, helping them to cement a new partnership. This article is an attempt to trace the civil nuclear relationship between India and Canada and to chart its future path. It has to be understood that the nuclear agreement between India and Canada is not restricted in its scope to just benefits for the two countries in developing nuclear technology and trade. It has larger economic and strategic benefits. India’s growing political and economic strength is promising. It is in Canada’s interest to pursue a closer relationship with India. It is in India’s interest to further strengthen this partnership in view of the resources and technology that Canada could provide India to achieve its development goals, especially its green agenda as ratified under the Paris Climate Change Agreement (2015).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndia Quarterly A Journal of International AffairsSame topicInternational Environmental Law and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207