Bibliographic record
Abstract
In his speech, the author focuses on the confrontation between the United States and China and the place of Russia in this confrontation. Several spheres of this rivalry stand out: ideological, geopolitical and military. By geopolitical rivalry the author means primarily the struggle for spheres of influence. The United States claims influence throughout the world, the PRC's claims clearly go beyond Asia, but, according to the author, they are not. According to the author United States, is a “pole” of power, while the PRC is only a center of power. He also mentions the desire of the United States to create a military-political alliance directed against the PRC. China is currently on par with or ahead of the United States on a number of macroeconomic indicators. For example, its GDP at the exchange rate will catch up with the United States in the second half of this decade. However, Washington still retains its monetary and financial advantage. As for military rivalry, the author examines, first of all, naval, missile and nuclear components. In terms of spending on both conventional and nuclear weapons, China ranks second after the United States but with a significant gap. The author agrees with the opinion that the nuclear potential of the PRC exceeds popular estimates. As for Russia, the author notes its significant lag behind the United States and China in terms of the main macroeconomic indicators, as well as R&D and defense expenditures. At present, Washington is carrying out a strategy of “dual containment” of both of Russia and China and does not believe that cooperation with the Russian Federation is necessary to contain the PRC. From the author's point of view, Russia is not interested in the growth of Chinese military power, both conventional and nuclear.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".