Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 17 "rare earth elements" are essential for the development of new technologies. Over the last several decades, China has established a virtual monopoly on the rare earth industry, producing over 97% of the world's current demand. This was achieved by effectively undercutting other producers who stopped competing in this market. In 2010, in an effort to bolster its domestic market, China decided to reduce the amount of rare earth elements that it would export. This situation can be used to consider China's relations with the rest of the world from two perspectives. (1) The realist perspective views China's actions as threatening to both the US hegemony and our system of international institutions. (2) Alternatively, the liberal view interprets the Chinese activities as defensive, protectionist and benign. The liberal view has more evidence to support it, considering economic, political and social constraints that prevent the Chinese leadership from taking total control of the international marketplace for the rare earth elements. To continue its long-term development and economic growth, a rational China will choose not to act in a way that would cause other countries to mistrust China.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".