Análisis comparado de la política exterior de seguridad humana de Canadá y Japón en Kosovo. Década de los noventa.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Los debates en torno al concepto de seguridad han aumentado debido al fortalecimiento de la Democracia Liberal, el Estado de Derecho y la proteccion de los Derechos Humanos. En este contexto, se han establecido nuevos enfoques de seguridad que responden a los desafios actuales que enfrenta el ser humano como alimentacion, trabajo, salud, educacion y vivienda. De esta manera, el enfoque restringido del concepto de seguridad entendido como la proteccion del Estado ha sido complementado, y no reemplazado, por la seguridad humana. Entre una gran variedad de posturas, Canada y Japon se destacan en el marco de los estudios de seguridad, especialmente, en el estudio y aplicacion de la seguridad humana. Kosovo, por su parte, se vio beneficiado por la participacion de Canada y Japon a la luz de los principios de Freedom from Fear y Freedom from Want durante su proceso de reconstruccion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".