MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311313037 · doi:10.1111/geoj.12503

Remote control? Chinese satellite infrastructure in and above the Arctic global commons

2022· article· en· W4311313037 on OpenAlexaff
Mia M. Bennett, Trym Eiterjord

Bibliographic record

VenueGeographical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopoliticsGlobal commonsChinaArcticCommonsRemote sensingEnvironmental resource managementGeographyEarth sciencePolitical scienceEnvironmental scienceGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract China is expanding its Arctic presence by developing infrastructure in the global commons that intersect with the region. Operations in outer space, the deep sea and cyberspace minimise the need for terrestrial footholds and generate data, a virtual resource. To analyse the epistemic and geopolitical consequences of developing the Arctic global commons as a vertically and digitally integrated volume, we examine a critical form of Chinese ‘remote infrastructure’: optical, synthetic aperture radar, and navigation satellites. We argue that first, by generating data about the Arctic, these instruments turn China into a regional knowledge producer. Second, as remote observations outnumber field observations, Chinese polar science may shift the regional balance of knowledge towards spaceborne and marine observations. Third, China's emergence as an Arctic knowledge producer may motivate the state to contribute to regional governance as remote sensing and large‐scale, computationally intensive techniques become privileged decision‐making tools. To transcend the terrestrial and maritime fixes that predominate research on China and the Arctic, we call for greater attention to the influence of epistemic capacities on geopolitics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeographical JournalSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207