MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intervention and Empire: John Stuart Mill and International Relations

2005· article· en· W1943366961 on OpenAlexaff
Carol A. L. Prager

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitical Studies · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Theory and Influence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMillIntervention (counseling)EmpireIntrospectionPoliticsInternational relationsSociologyLawPolitical scienceHistoryPsychologyEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is surprising that John Stuart Mill's international thought, which focuses on intervention and empire, has not attracted the attention it warrants. It is particularly surprising that Mill has been largely overlooked by the English School, whose members acutely appreciate the contributions of classical political philosophers to international discourse. Galvanised by his introspection on his life, especially the impact of interference in his psychological and intellectual development, to his analysis of the impact of Britain on India's princely states and intervention in civil wars, Mill identified timeless problems intrinsic to international relations whilst profoundly appreciating the tensions they generated in the form of perverse effects, unintended consequences and moral hazard. Contemporary international relations are replete with examples of the unforeseen and unforeseeable developments that attend intervention and interference. If a concern of the English School is the tormenting decisions that fall to statesmen, Mill provides an understanding of the considerations that vastly complicate such decisions.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.018
Scholarly communication0.0130.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations11
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitical StudiesSame topicPolitical Theory and InfluenceFrench-language works237,207