Intranational synergies and trade-offs reveal common and differentiated priorities of sustainable development goals in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accelerating efforts for the Sustainable Development Goals requires understanding their synergies and trade-offs at the national and sub-national levels, which will help identify the key hurdles and opportunities to prioritize them in an indivisible manner for a country. Here, we present the importance of the 17 goals through synergy and trade-off networks. Our results reveal that 19 provinces show the highest trade-offs in SDG13 (Combating Climate Change) or SDG5 (Gender Equality) consistent with the national level, with other 12 provinces varying. 24 provinces show the highest synergies in SDG1 (No Poverty) or SDG6 (Clean Water and Sanitation) consistent with the national level, with the remaining 7 provinces varying. These common but differentiated SDG priorities reflect that to ensure a coordinated national response, China should pay more attention to the provincial situation, so that provincial governments can formulate more targeted policies in line with their own priorities towards accelerating sustainable development.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".