MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

China’s Grand Strategy in the Context of the Sino-US Strategic Rivalry

2025· article· en· W4415521566 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVestnik RUDN International Relations · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Political and Economic Relations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of CambridgeUniversity of OxfordYork UniversityPrinceton University
KeywordsGrand strategyRivalryGlobal strategyContext (archaeology)OffensiveStrategic planningChinaForeign policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study focuses on the transformation of China’s grand strategy in the context of the ongoing, long-term Sino-US strategic rivalry. In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the study of China’s grand strategy in global politics. To date, at the international level, the relevant study has been overwhelmingly dominated by the American school and narrative based on American realism. This paper therefore conducts the relevant research from a Chinese perspective. The study explores the evolution of the US China policy and the transformation of China’s grand strategy in the context of the Sino-US strategic rivalry. In particular, it demonstrates the linkage between China’s grand strategy evolution and the Sino-US relations. Furthermore, it provides an analysis of the implications of China’s grand strategy transformation. The research methodologies mainly contain comparative, analytical and inductive approaches. A conceptual framework is outlined, illustrating how the US policy and approaches towards China navigate the Sino-US rivalry and transform China’s grand strategy-making and its foreign policy implementation. The author concludes that it is the strategic rivalry and US policy towards China that are transforming China’s “grand strategy” from a defensive to an offensive model. Bloc-driven policy is one of the defining factors in the Chinese-American confrontation. However, in the case of the U.S., the obvious anti-Chinese orientation of the blocs created by Washington may cause a negative reaction from potential allies. In turn, China, relying on the states of the Global South, is also building a network of global partnerships in which such structures as the BRICS, which is becoming increasingly attractive to developing countries. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is also a significant player, and if it expands further, it could become the largest military-political bloc in the Eurasian space.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.285 · 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