MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1550817006 · doi:10.5539/ass.v11n16p107

Reinterpreting the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Constructivism Theory of Understanding a Cross-Ethnic Phenomena

2015· article· en· W1550817006 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mehrzad Javadikouchaksaraei, Mohammad Reevany Bustami, Azeem Fazwan Ahmad Farouk, Ali Akbar Ramazaniandarzi

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstructivism (international relations)Social constructivismNationalismEthnic groupNational identityEthnic conflictSociologyIdentity (music)EpistemologyConflict resolutionContext (archaeology)PoliticsPolitical scienceInternational relationsSocial psychologyPolitical economyGender studiesSocial scienceLawPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study proposes the use of constructivist analysis approaches to analyze Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians. Constructivism theory is important for understanding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The building of a social-political reality can determine the trajectory of protests and violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the past 60 years in direct association with the crystallization of nationalism and national identity. This paper analyses and explains the Israeli-Palestinian relations through the international relations theory in constructivism and elucidates in depth the reasons for the current struggle in the historical context and the concept of identity.

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)0.005
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.026
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207