MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981138147 · doi:10.1007/s12290-011-0161-7

The Transatlantic Relationship: An Alliance of Values

2011· article· en· W1981138147 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Crowley

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean View · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Union Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityArthur B. McDonald-Canadian Astroparticle Physics Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlliancePolitical scienceState (computer science)Political economyPoliticsDemocracyGeneral partnershipPolitical cultureLawCreating shared valueSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The long-standing close relationship between the democracies of Europe and North America has been based on shared values. However, the central value we share is not democracy in the abstract. Rather, it is the spirit of individual liberty and the conviction, deeply rooted in our culture, that governments must be bound by the rule of law that preserves the rights of individuals and of minorities, plus a willingness to make sacrifices to defend these values. The will to protect and defend these values have been eroding on both sides of the Atlantic. But the process of erosion is clearly further advanced in Europe, where the institutions of the welfare state matter enormously and large portions of the populace have become dependent on state aid. These developments have brought both Americans and Europeans to a crossroads. On the one hand, Americans must resist the seductive urge to shrug off global responsibilities and retreat into isolation and, on the other, Europeans must beware of pushing their North American allies away. To preserve the transatlantic partnership we must grasp that what increasingly divides us is not policy disputes or political styles but the crumbling commitment of Western culture to the values that made it special and without which no will to defend it can possibly exist.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean ViewSame topicEuropean Union Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207