MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097175187 · doi:10.15355/2.1.35

Privatizing and internationalizing violence

2007· article· en· W2097175187 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Herbert Wulf

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Economics of Peace and Security Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Peace and Security Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersZentrum für Entwicklungsforschung, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität BonnUniversity of OxfordUniversity of CambridgeInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsMonopolyState (computer science)Use of forceIntervention (counseling)DemocracyPolitical sciencePolitical economyPoliticsInternational relationsLaw and economicsBusinessEconomicsLawMarket economyInternational law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Privatization of violence and international interventions to stop wars are two recent trends in wars. Both affect how the traditional state monopoly of force is exercised and on how armed forces operate. The concept of state monopoly of force is now questioned since the execution of force is increasingly delegated to armed nonstate actors. Nationally organized armed forces are outdated, given the new international tasks. Since the role of the nation-state in security has changed so fundamentally, it is argued that changes in three political and legal fields are necessary: Private military companies need to be regulated; the democratic deficit in international bodies which decide on international intervention needs to be overcome; and the monopoly of force needs to be re-conceptualized.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Economics of Peace and Security JournalSame topicGlobal Peace and Security DynamicsFrench-language works237,207