MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977810191 · doi:10.1177/1477370812454645

Dealing with international crimes in post-war Bosnia: A look through the lens of the affected population

2012· article· en· W1977810191 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Criminology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Peace and Security Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersScience and Engineering Research Board
KeywordsTransitional justiceAccountabilityPoliticsHuman rightsPolitical scienceCivilian populationPopulationCriminologyWar crimeEconomic JusticePolitical economySociologyLawInternational law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Debates about serious human rights violations and international crimes committed in the past appear during times of political transition. New political elites are confronted with fundamental questions of how to seek truth, establish accountability for offenders, provide reparation to victims, promote reconciliation, deal with trauma and build trust. ‘Transitional’ or ‘post-conflict justice’ is most often managed by elites, national and international, while the views and expectations of the local populations are rarely taken into account. Population-based research can yield deep insights into strategies and mechanisms for dealing with the crimes of the past. This paper reports on the major findings of a study in Bosnia and on the factors that may contribute to trust and reconciliation in the country.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.738
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.251 · 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