Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ongoing tectonic power shifts in the global system have become the paramount topic for academic reflection and political strategies in international affairs.A group of rising powers from the global South is effectively challenging western predominance, the hallmark of the global order over the last two centuries.Different labels and analytical categories are used in identifying the new powerhouses, such as Asian drivers of global change, anchor countries, and now the B(R)ICSAM constellation of Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and Mexico, introduced by the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) in Waterloo, Canada.This highly innovative think tank has been at the forefront of systematic research on global governance arrangements that would be capable of addressing the survival issues of sustainable development and equity.CIGI's research is built on longterm transnational networking that brings together high-ranking scholars from the industrialized and the developing worlds.The volume at hand is an excellent example of the timeliness and inclusiveness that characterize CIGI publications.It takes a comprehensive view of the Heiligendamm Process (HP) established in 2007 by German chancellor Angela Merkel, then G8 host.This outreach effort of the leading industrialized countries toward those five emerging powers provides a new framework for issue-based informal exchanges on crucial aspects of global policy making.Due to end in 2009, the HP has come half the way in trying to build trust and identify common approaches to pressing problems.It remains to be seen if it can open the gate to a formal expansion of the G8
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.685 | 0.649 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".