MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3027880885 · doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12816

Power versus Leadership?

2020· article· en· W3027880885 on OpenAlex
Ann Fitzgerald, Andrew S. Thompson

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Policy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Relations and Foreign Policy
Canadian institutionsBalsillie School of International Affairs
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaPower (physics)Soft powerPolitical scienceOrder (exchange)Construct (python library)Corporate governanceWorld orderHard powerGlobal governancePolitical economyEuropean unionWorld War IIDevelopment economicsEconomyInternational tradeEconomicsLawManagementPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract European power in the 21st century is not what it was in the 20th century. The rules‐based liberal international order that Europe helped to construct after the Second World War is under threat, and arguably in decline. As this ‘order’ diminishes, so too does Europe’s ability to influence world events. While Europe will never command either the military or economic hard and ‘sharp’ power of the United States or China, it remains an important international actor with considerable soft power, even with the United Kingdom’s recent departure from the union. Although we question some of the assumptions and priorities identified by the authors of ‘Enhancing Europe’s Global Power’, we share their view that a united and strong Europe has a great deal to offer to the world, particularly in the areas of data governance and tertiary education.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.267 · 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