MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235695400 · doi:10.1108/oxan-db254074

US attention will shift to the Arctic

2020· other· en· W4235695400 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerald expert briefings · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticThe arcticChinaMemorandumPolitical scienceCompetition (biology)Power (physics)Natural resourceSkepticismGeographyOceanographyLawEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significance The Arctic memorandum signals greater concern in the US defence community and Congress over rising great-power competition in the region. Russia has become more assertive militarily, while China is seeking greater presence, including in 2018 expressing interest in building airfields in Greenland. Impacts Trump’s scepticism about NATO will make coordinating with allies over the Arctic more difficult. China and the United States will both seek access to Arctic natural resources. Greater US focus on the Arctic could cause tensions with Canada over the Northwest Passage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1250.029

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmerald expert briefingsSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207