MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1515053903

Interoperability of United States and Canadian Armed Forces

2005· article· en· W1515053903 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gary Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueDuke journal of comparative & international law · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary and Defense Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfantryGeneral partnershipTerrorismNational securityLawPolitical sciencePublic administration
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When the soldiers of the First Special Service Force (FSSF) scaled the sheer cliffs of Mount de la Difensa in Italy during the evening of December 2, 1943, they surprised the German defenders and seized key terrain that had resisted such capture for months. 1 The complexity of this operation would have challenged the elite infantry forces of either Canada or the United States.Nevertheless, this unit, composed of soldiers wearing the uniforms of both nations and led by both Canadian and United States officers and noncommissioned officers, accomplished this and other equally difficult missions during the latter part of WWII. 2 Since WWII, Canada and the United States (U.S.) have built on this legacy, forging a remarkable military partnership, performing combined 3 or multinational 4 military operations.Perhaps the mostCopyright ©2005 by Gary Walsh * Gary Walsh is the International and Operational Law Advisor, Office of the Staff Judge Advocate

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0090.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDuke journal of comparative & international lawSame topicMilitary and Defense StudiesFrench-language works237,207