Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The rise of the brics block has contributed to the emergence of a “multiplex world”. This shift in power dynamics has revealed the crisis of the existing liberal international order, a relative decline in the U.S. power, and a gradual transition towards a post-American order. This article examines the dynamics of Sino- mena relations in a “multiplex world” where both the U.S. and the mena states have chosen “The Look East” policy. The U.S.-China geopolitical rivalry explains a shift in the U.S. foreign policy from the Middle East toward the Far East. The Middle East’s “Look East Policy”, however, is largely due to the needs for an alternative global partner. This article examines three pillars of the Sino- mena relations: the first pillar pertains to a broad category of energy, trade, investment, arms deal, security and geostrategic significance. The second pillar is centred around the Chinese policy of no military intervention and respecting the state sovereignty. The third pillar is pertinent to the “Chinese Model of Development” and what it means for the mena . It examines whether such relations might consolidate autocratic capitalism and neoliberalism without democracy and, or benefit mena civil societies’ quest for a grassroots and egalitarian development and democracy.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".