MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030880336 · doi:10.1080/21624887.2013.801126

<i>Critical Studies on Security</i>: an introduction

2013· article· en· W2030880336 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

VenueCritical Studies on Security · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Security and Public Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTechnocracyInternational relationsMetaphorArgument (complex analysis)Power (physics)PoliticsMedia studiesSociologyClassicsLawPolitical sciencePhilosophyHistoryTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes 1. To be precise, the conference was hosted by the York Centre for International and Strategic Studies. The Centre's name was changed in 1996 in response to the same political and intellectual developments that gave rise to Critical Security Studies. 2. Perhaps the most striking instance of the difficulty of mixing forms was William Wallace's 'Truth and Power, Monks and Technocrats' (Wallace Citation1996). The talk developed an elaborate metaphor of monastic orders to talk about the divisions and orthodoxies of International Relations. As with any such metaphor, the further it was pushed, the more it would break down. For an after dinner speech, pushing it some distance was quite funny; however, the article which followed found its important, and still influential, argument tarnished somewhat by the vestiges of the monasticism. 3. One of the most important moments in the emergence of critical International Relations more broadly was the publication in 1990 of a special issue of International Studies Quarterly, the lead house journal of the International Studies Association, edited by Richard Ashley and RBJ Walker titled: 'Speaking the Language of Exile' (Ashley and Walker Citation1990). 4. Peace Research, which grew in through the 1970s and into the 1980s to become a dominant site of opposition to traditional strategic studies, is an obvious exception, as it quite explicitly engaged with the dominant discourse with that discourse's own quantitative tools. See the Journal of Peace Research, throughout its history, for examples of this excellent work.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.360 · 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