MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W600799030 · doi:10.7202/703708ar

Îles-frontières, territoires impossibles?

2005· article· en· W600799030 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Philippe Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIsland Studies and Pacific Affairs
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaIdeal (ethics)Political scienceEconomyGeographyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Japan has a tradition of borders, not only at sea but also on land. Given the country's insularity and historical development, the former kind are the ones that will be of concern to international relations. Their demarcation, and the disputes that may arise with adjacent maritime countries (Russia, China, Korea), are a legacy of both history and geography. A remote island is not necessarily an ideal point for marking off a territory, as exemplified by the Takeshima/Tok-to islets which Japan and Korea have been disputing. The recent delimitation of maritime Exclusive Economic Zones is raising the stakes and stirring up tensions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes internationalesSame topicIsland Studies and Pacific AffairsFrench-language works237,207