MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1606416546

Nuclear Imminence in Contemporary Indo‐Pakistani Conflict

2009· article· en· W1606416546 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anna K. Tobin

Bibliographic record

VenueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNuclear Issues and Defense
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnrestTerrorismNuclear weaponPolitical scienceEthnic groupSpanish Civil WarSouth asiaLawDevelopment economicsAncient historyHistoryPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

November of 2008 saw frightening attacks on India’s foreigners. Over the course of three days, hostages had been taken, hotels and restaurants in India’s busiest city of Mumbai were burned and English, American and Canadian citizens lay among the nearly 200 dead. Pakistani terrorists were arrested and held accountable for this act of brutality. However, it seemed that tensions had just begun. The upset of peace in Indo-Pakistani relations fuelled the international communities’ fear of a nuclear war between the two nations. This paper will address this concern and discover that such acts of terrorism do not reflect nuclear imminence due to tensions between the Indian and Pakistani states. However, they do reflect unrest within Indian and Pakistani civil society; a civil society that is both tied and fragmented by ethnic and religious identity. The fear of nuclear war in this historically conflicted region of South East Asia may aid in the plight for peace by forcing these states to accept international norms and treaties on nuclear proliferation.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)Same topicNuclear Issues and DefenseFrench-language works237,207