MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389931579 · doi:10.54097/ajmss.v5i2.23

Competition and Cooperation: A Study of the Motivation of China-U.S. Cooperation and Conflict Management in the New Era

2023· article· en· W4389931579 on OpenAlexaff
Zidong Weng

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic journal of management and social sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaCompetition (biology)ConstructiveFace (sociological concept)Political sciencePoliticsInternational conflictInternational tradeConflict managementInvestment (military)Economic systemPolitical economyEconomicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At present, China and the United States are the world’s largest economies and important international political forces. China-U.S. relations are both driven by cooperation and face certain conflict challenges. On the one hand, the impetus for China-US cooperation comes from their respective economic interests and common global challenges, and China-US trade and investment cooperation has played a positive role in the economic growth and employment of the two countries. On the other hand, there are some potential conflict factors in China-US relations, such as trade friction, military competition, regional strife and other issues, which may lead to the escalation of conflict between China and the U.S. This paper aims to study the motivation of China-US cooperation in the new era as well as how to carry out effective conflict control, so as to put forward some constructive suggestions for competition and cooperation between China and the United States.

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)0.003
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic journal of management and social sciencesSame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207