MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2881483148

The New Geopolitics of Globalization: Bulls, Pandas and the Road to Charlevoix

2018· article· en· W2881483148 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. Nicolas J. Firzli

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSummitGeopoliticsProsperityPolitical scienceChinaPoliticsGlobalizationFinancial crisisEconomyLawEconomicsGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rising tensions in the Yellow Sea, a festering ‘Migrant Crisis’ in Europe and Africa and resurgent antagonisms in the Persian Gulf are further threatening the Post-War social contract bequeathed by President Truman, Gen. Marshall and Gen. Eisenhower: praetorian Midwestern pragmatists whose work underpinned political stability and economic prosperity globally for more than 70 years... A geoeconomic realignment seems to be under way: the Canadian Prime Minister has announced his intention to join the China-backed AIIB, thus becoming the first North American member of the institution, a bold political decision that aligns with the country’s thirst for overseas investments in infrastructure – an asset class where Canadian pension funds have become the world’s leading financial investors. Tellingly, Trudeau has traveled repeatedly to Beijing, discussing the future of free trade, international monetary policy coordination, infrastructure investment, climate change and global labor law norms, thus giving the Chinese leadership a high-level ‘sneak preview’ of the upcoming G7 Summit (Charlevoix, June 2018), a gathering founded by the United States, of which China isn’t even a member.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.022
Scholarly communication0.0130.008
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicCanadian Policy and Governance→French-language works237,207→