Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neutrality is a difficult position to maintain in a hostile international system. Switzerland is often seen as a successful case of neutrality, managing to both remain neutral and avoid conflict for centuries. This paper examines the possible reasons for the success of Swiss neutrality. It also positions the Swiss experience in comparison to other neutral states. Building upon and consolidating previous research and thought, we define three attributes that allow the Swiss to successfully maintain their neutrality. First is the armed deterrent worked into the national culture; armed neutrality is not just a policy position but a way of life for many Swiss. Second is the idea of Swiss neutrality as a collective good in that Switzerland is a safe haven for humanitarian and diplomatic exchanges. Finally the Swiss benefit from a history of neutrality that has been enshrined into international law and custom. We conclude by noting that the experience of Swiss neutrality is not normal, rather it is a successful outlier that has succeeded in preserving its status in times of war and peace. Moreover, we posit that exploring the reasons for its success can help us understand neutrality better and also the potential of small state foreign policy. Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".