Le basculement vers le Sud de la politque de défense de l’Espagne (Note)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Entering the 21st century, the question facing mankind is whether we will be able to find, agree upon and activate solutions adequate to resolve world problems which have plagued the 20th century and which increasingly threaten the 21 st. The central argument presented here is that it is only by taking concrete steps at the world level that we can hope to reduce or eliminate the threat to survival which these problems represent. In order to provide a framework from which prospects for the future of the world organization can be analysed, the "world order" perspective is compared with a more traditional perspective. The challenges that world problems and crises pose for the world organization are examined. Using the fundamental changes undergone by both the League of Nations and the United Nations as an historical basis for scrutinizing the future, the changes that increasingly complex problems may force on the world organization are explored. Changes such as a "reinforced United Nations" (without delegation of sovereignty), a "World Authority" (with partial delegation of sovereignty) or a "World Government" (with major delegation of sovereignty) are evaluated in terms of the world organization' s ability to handle potential world crises and problems. The conclusion establishes that there is a pressing need for immediate political action which would aim towards a coalition of all groups researching solutions to world problems and would be based on the "world order" ideology of the majority rather than the "world-oriented" ideology of a self-interested minority.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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".