Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article offers an examination of international developments central to globalisation in India and reviews India’s approach to some prominent multilateral treaty systems such as the United Nations (UN), the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the international climate change regime, and the nuclear non-proliferation and test-ban regimes. It argues that, to be a responsible and true global player, India needs to move beyond its membership of narrowly based power caucuses within these regimes to constructively address the greater challenges that these treaties are focused on. Thus, India’s engagement with the multilateral system needs to be one that serves the interests of the system rather than the national interests of India alone. Through a historical overview of India’s multilateralism, the article probes India’s variable contemporary performance in four substantive fields of foreign policy to assess India’s multilateral stance during the postCold War period. It evaluates India’s diplomatic approach to global challenges like climate change and the wider multilateral system to reiterate the need for India to engage further in multilateral diplomacy and address global challenges, going beyond narrow conceptions of the nation’s bilateral partnerships. India’s aspiration to be a great power will only materialise if it is prepared to balance its political and economic obligations, both nationally and internationally.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".