MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146744335

South Africa’s Evolving Role in Peacekeeping: National Interest and International Responsibilities

2003· article· en· W2146744335 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Theo Neethling

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of military and strategic studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPeacebuilding and International Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeacekeepingNational interestMultinational corporationPolitical sciencePoliticsGovernment (linguistics)Foreign policyInternational relationsPublic administrationDevelopment economicsEconomic growthLawEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The South African Government holds the view that it has no choice but to accept participation in peacekeeping as a foreign policy priority, and that the country should continue to engage in challenges of a peacekeeping nature. South Africa consequently maintains that an approach of close political-military involvement in regional and continental matters should be pursued. The aim of this paper is to analyze and assess the extent to which self-declared concerns in relation to South Africa’s national interest and international profile underpin and inform the country’s recent and current involvement in international peacekeeping. Practically speaking, an attempt is made to understand and reflect on the preoccupations of South African decision-makers with the questions of national interest and international responsibilities as the South African Government has moved to involve the South African military in multinational peacekeeping endeavors on the African continent.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of military and strategic studiesSame topicPeacebuilding and International SecurityFrench-language works237,207