MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405532511 · doi:10.1017/9781788216524.004

Rethinking firepower and geopolitics

2023· other· en· W4405532511 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary and Defense Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFirepowerGeopoliticsPolitical scienceGeographyArchaeologyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“Once you have done your homework you realize we need new politics, we need new economics … We need a whole new way of thinking.” Greta Thunberg, speech at EESC event “Civil Society for rEUnaissance” There were fortunes to be made in coal and then oil, and now gas too. More than just fortunes are involved; modern economies depend on these fuels, and states only function if fuels are available to keep modern life going. Access to fuel has been essential to the security of modern states and their inhabitants. The rivalries of states and corporations, the struggles for dominance and control, the political arguments about who has access to what where matters. In other words, geopolitics are indivisible from fossil fuels in the modern world. Other resources have been involved in all sorts of conflict and imperial plunder through history (LeBillon 2012), but oil has pride of place in recent decades. A sustainable future now requires dismantling these systems and replacing both the technologies and their social and economic arrangements with ones fit for a small vulnerable biosphere. No longer can assumptions of a big world as a stage for geopolitics operate if the long-term future of humanity is to be secured. Numerous peoples have long paid a high price for the struggles for power and space set in motion by European colonization and the expansion of capitalism through the Earth system (Grove 2019). Now even those who have benefited most from these colonial arrangements and their subsequent evolution into the global economy are beginning to feel the impacts of sea-level rise and climate disruption. The large oil companies are truly global companies with holdings and infrastructure in many countries. Crucially in many places they held the rights to exploit petroleum and their wealth was tied to the valuations of these reserves. This is often still the case and stock values are linked directly to gaining access to what lies deep underground. States have struggled to exploit these resources and enrich themselves in the process too. The case of the Gulf States, sheikdoms sitting on oil fields, emphasizes the point that there are vast fortunes to be made. But fuel resources are unevenly spread around the globe, and while some states and corporations have gained enormous wealth others have had economic disruptions because of their dependence on fuel from abroad.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMilitary and Defense StudiesFrench-language works237,207