Bibliographic record
Abstract
The « War of Attrition » constituted one of the crises of the ongoing Arab-Israeli confrontation. From March 8th 1969 Arab revendications for restoration by Israel of the territories lost in 1967 took, under Egyptian direction and the urging of the Palestinian movement, the form of a limited armed conflict. We postulate that the evolution of this crisis depended not only on the capabilities of the belligerents nor on the intervention of the superpowers but also on the objectives of the principal actors. Analysis of these objectives confirms the radical nature of the hostility between Egypt and Israel and the both defensive and restitutory aspect of each country's goals. It emphasizes above all that the object of the crisis was basically the occupied territories dispute and that the cease-fire has left a legacy of heightened disaffection in comparison with the period preceding the crisis. Examination of the behavioral data enables the delimitation of not only the dyadic and polarized configuration of the confrontation but also the latter's context. The search for a purely interactional determination of behaviour leads one to put forward prudently that an increase in lsraeli coercion is related to deescalation while an aggravation of Egyptian belligerence produces the opposite effect. The latter being often preceded in Cairo by the articulation of negative objectives, one could conclude, provisionally, that the « War of Attrition » evolved according to a multivariate open model in which the objectives of Cairo determined the conduct of Israel subject to the intervening Egyptian behavioural variable.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
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".