Bibliographic record
Abstract
Donald Trump skal styre USA fram til 2029. Det er imperativt for norsk sikkerhet at høstens valgvinner i 2025 får forholdet til USA til å fungere, og bygger videre på det vellykkede toppmøtet i det ovale kontoret 24. april. Tett forsvars- og etterretningssamarbeid om Russland i nord, og gode personlige relasjoner gjør Norges utgangspunkt godt. Vi må dog bli mer bevisste på realiseringen av våre egne interesser, i en mer anarkisk verden der andre ikke kan forventes å ivareta vår sikkerhet. Vi må forutsette at norsk utenrikspolitikk faktisk kan forme Trump noe som politiker og tilskynde realiseringen av felles utenrikspolitiske mål. Norsk verdibasert multilateralisme må bestå, men må tilpasses den dominante bilateralisten Trump. Norsk utenrikspolitikk må ta innover seg hva Trumps utenrikspolitikk blir. Vi må unngå unødig friksjon overfor en politiker som kan skifte mening raskt. Empirien fra 2024-valget og fram til innsettelsen indikerer at Trump vil stå for en enda mer transaksjonell utenrikspolitikk enn før, der handel og sikkerhet er helt sammensmeltet. På merkantilistisk vis skisserer Trump ekspansjonistisk at den vestlige hemisfære skal ytterligere domineres av USA gjennom utstrakt bruk av økonomiske maktmidler og voldsomme tollsatser overfor Canada, Panama, Mexico(-golfen) og Grønland. Fra en forsterket regional maktposisjon vil Trump konfrontere Kina. Det betyr at Europa i tiltakende grad må stagge Russland på egen hånd. Abstract in EnglishNorway, Trump and the USA Towards 2030Donald Trump will lead the United States until 2029. It is imperative to Norwegian security that the winner of this fall’s elections can make the US-Norwegian relationship work, building on the successful bilateral meeting in the oval office on April 24th. Furthermore, close defense and intelligence cooperation in the High North as well as good personal relations make for a good start. Norway must, however, become more cognizant of the realization of its own national interests to achieve security in an anarchic world. Norway must assume that its foreign policy can shape both the relationship and Trump as a counterpart in pursuit of common foreign policy goals. Norway must uphold its values-based multilateralism, while adjusting its policy to a dominant bilateralist like Trump. Norway must cater to and acknowledge Trump’s foreign policy, and adjust to avoid unnecessary friction with a politician who can make swift policy shifts. The empirical evidence following Trump’s election indicate that Trump 2.0 will adopt an even more transactional foreign policy, in which trade and security blend completely. Trump’s dominant course seems mercantilist. His rhetoric of expansion in the Western Hemisphere challenges established borders and involves heavy-handed augmentation of formidable economic power. This includes tariffs and outspoken imperial ambitions towards Canada, (the Gulf of) Mexico, the Panama Canal and Greenland. From a strengthened regional position, Trump seeks to confront China in the Indo-Pacific theater. This leaves Europe to balance Russia more on its own.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.152 | 0.058 |
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".