Civil-Military Coordination: Challenges and Opportunities in Afghanistan and Beyond
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This special issue of The Journal of Military and Strategic Studies is edited by Lara Olson and Hrach Gregorian of the Peacebuilding, Development and Security (PDS) Program , which was initiated at the University of Calgary in 2007 with funding from CMSS, and represents a partnership between CMSS and the Institute of World Affairs . The papers expand on presentations made at an expert workshop held in Calgary by the CMSS and the Institute of World Affairs on Coordinated Approaches to Security, Development and Peacekeeping: Lessons Learned from Afghanistan and Liberia . This issue is significant but little examined, perhaps because it lies on the intersection between traditional conceptions of defence policy, peacekeeping and the work of NGOs. These matters all will be illuminated by a study of this issue as a topic in its own right. The Journal of Military and Strategic Studies is happy to serve as host to this endeavour.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".