MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389855405 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23793

Structural analysis of global mineral governance system from the perspective of country

2023· article· en· W4389855405 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiaojing Yuan, Zhe Ma, Anjian Wang, Tianjiao Li, Weiqiong Zhong, Bujie Li, Pengyuan Li, Jiangqiao Wei, Hongchang Hao

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina Geological SurveyNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCorporate governanceContext (archaeology)GlobalizationProject governanceBusinessProcess (computing)Economic systemChinaRegional scienceEconomicsPolitical scienceSociologyGeographyMarket economyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The uneven spatial distribution of mineral resources necessitates the construction of mature global mineral governance system to ensure rational allocation of mineral resources. To this end, it is essential to analyze the structure of the global mineral governance system to provide a theoretical basis for the construction. The governance actor is the crucial element in driving the governance process, and country serves as the most central actor. Therefore, clarifying the roles and statuses of different countries in the governance system will be helpful to analyze the structure of the governance system. In the context of advancing globalization, a complex cooperative relationship has been presented between countries based on international organizations. Thus, we establish a national cooperation network based on the principle of the co-existence of countries in international organizations, to quantify these relationships between countries and identify the role and status of different countries, as well as the country communities in the cooperation network, by combining the characteristics of the countries in the network with the actual performance in the organizations. The research findings are as follow: (1) The UK, Germany, France, Sweden, and Canada play pivotal roles in promoting international cooperation as well as leading governance in the governance system. (2) Emerging economies are more actively engaged in these organizations and can promote international cooperation, but lack the capacity to assume leadership roles in governance. (3) The U.S. and China have a stronger ability to lead than to cooperate in the governance system. (4) Most African and South American countries, as well as some European nations, are marginalized in the governance system. (5) Countries with the same needs and similar economic and political conditions belong to the same community: The European countries and the U.S., consumer with a high level of economic and political development but low mineral resource endowment are in the first community. Canada, Australia, and certain African and South American countries, producers with high mineral resource endowments are in the second community. Most African and South American countries with lower levels of economic and political development are in the third group.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.209
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207