MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215347049 · doi:10.19088/1968-2021.118

Mutual Learning in Development Cooperation: China and the West

2021· article· en· W3215347049 on OpenAlex

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

VenueIDS Bulletin · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersForeign, Commonwealth and Development OfficeGovernment of the United KingdomJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsChinaOpenAccessPolitical scienceContext (archaeology)Strengths and weaknessesModalitiesDevelopment aidEconomic growthOrder (exchange)SociologyLivelihoodGeographyBusinessEconomicsPsychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article looks at some of the characteristics of China’s foreign aid system and its development over the years. It discusses China’s foreign aid based on its own development experiences and its view of South–South development cooperation. Both the modalities and narratives of China’s international development cooperation need to be considered in order to better understand the complexities, strengths, and weaknesses of its aid system. As China’s international aid continues to grow and become more prominent, particularly in the context of the Belt and Road Initiative, the article calls for a deeper understanding of China’s aid institutions and the need for greater cooperation and capacity building.

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)0.001
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 score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.240 · 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