Le facteur chinois dans la définition de la politique indienne en Indo-Pacifique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article explique commentl’accroissement de la rivalité sino-indienne,cristallisée autour de l’opposition de New Delhi auxprojets chinois Nouvelles routes de la soie (Belt and Road Initiative),a amené l’Inde à reconceptualiser son environnementstratégique immédiat et redimensionner ses instruments depolitique étrangère. La politique régionale del’Inde dépasse en effet aujourd’hui le complexe desécurité sud-asiatique conceptualisé par BarryBuzan et Ole Weaver pour s’insérer dans un espacetransrégional, l’espace indopacifique. La construction dece nouvel espace géoéconomique et géopolitique estfavorisée par la convergence stratégique et normativeexistant entre l’Inde, les États-Unis, l’Australieet le Japon. La mise en oeuvre de la politique indienne dansl’espace indopacifique se traduit par une diplomatie active, quivise à garantir la sécurité maritime del’Inde, offrir une option politique et économique auxprojets chinois de route de la soie, et renforcer l’influenceindienne dans la zone.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".