MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225994654 · doi:10.3917/ris.125.0031

Dynamique des corridors ferroviaires en Asie centrale : autour de la Chine, coopération ou rivalités entre puissances régionales ?

2022· article· fr· W4225994654 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

VenueRevue internationale et stratégique · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChina's Global Influence and Migration
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceCivil servantArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lancée en 2013, la Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) est un vaste programme destiné à renforcer la « connectivité » entre la Chine et d’autres régions du monde. Dans ce cadre, plusieurs projets de corridors de transport ont émergé entre la Chine et l’Europe via l’Asie centrale. Ils ont suscité tout à la fois l’intérêt et l’appréhension des États de la région, soucieux de tirer profit des projets chinois tout en préservant leur indépendance. Ainsi, les « nouvelles routes de la soie » sont-elles un facteur de convergence des intérêts des États de la région ou un facteur de rivalités ? Seront ici analysées les relations entre la Chine, la Russie, le Kazakhstan, la Turquie et l’Iran au prisme de leur perception des projets de corridors ferroviaires qui ont émergé ou ont été remis au goût du jour depuis 2013.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.307 · 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