MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2228141736

Defining Terrorism: The Need for a Restrained Definition

2008· article· en· W2228141736 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kent Roach

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrorismPolitical scienceNuclear terrorismLawCriminologyLaw and economicsSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the more difficult issues discussed in the meetings leading to the Ottawa Principles on Anti-terrorism and Human Rights was whether they should address or endorse any definition of terrorism. The fact that the group that met in Ottawa spent considerable time on this issue and had difficulty reaching agreement on it should not be surprising. It is well known that a general definition of terrorism has so far eluded international agreement. Instead, the existing conventions on terrorism focus on specific forms of terrorism such as hijackings, bombings, and most recently nuclear terrorism.

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)0.131
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.102
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 score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1310.102
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.006
Science and technology studies0.0120.137
Scholarly communication0.0240.063
Open science0.0120.020
Research integrity0.0140.058
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceFrench-language works237,207