MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004939650 · doi:10.2202/1554-8597.1213

A Novel Explanation of the Power-Law Form of the Frequency of Severe Terrorist Events: Reply to Saperstein

2010· article· en· W2004939650 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron Clauset, Maxwell Young, Kristian Skrede Gleditsch

Bibliographic record

VenuePeace Economics Peace Science and Public Policy · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrorismPower (physics)Work (physics)LawPolitical scienceLaw and economicsSociologyEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Saperstein (2010) discusses recent work on the striking empirical observation that the frequency and severity of terrorist attacks follows a power-law relationship — a pattern noted for wars by Richardson (1948, 1960) more than 50 years ago. We are pleased with Saperstein's interest in our work. We do, however, feel obliged to correct a few small mistakes in his commentary and would like to take this opportunity to make several more general remarks about research in this area.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations14
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeace Economics Peace Science and Public PolicySame topicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceFrench-language works237,207