MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7075644475

Reviewing Britain's Presence East of Suez : Australian, Canadian and New Zealand Foreign Policy Considerations Surrounding Southeast Asia, 1956-1971

2022· article· en· W7075644475 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign policyCold warWhite paperWhite (mutation)National securityInternational relationsSoutheast asiaForeign relations
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maike Hausen presents a transnational, multi-perspective review of strategic and security discussions among the former British white settler colonies Australia, Canada and New Zealand in the 1960s. Focusing on the foreign policy debate surrounding the British decision to withdraw their military 'East of Suez' from Southeast Asia, she reviews extensive source material to examine the transformation of political, diplomatic and strategic ties between Great Britain and Australia, Canada and New Zealand. By embedding the East of Suez discussion into a larger framework of long-term postcolonial transformations and developments of the Cold War and decolonisation, the study traces how the British decision upset the traditional conduct of concerted foreign policy and led to notions of crisis and uncertainty as well as to reviews that would ultimately contribute to more independent national outlooks and policies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.015
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207