MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331678861 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v9n2p138

Analysis of International Terrorism Criminography in the Event of September 11th, 2011

2016· article· en· W2331678861 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamad Esmael Zadeh, Mahdi Najjar Sadeghi, Amir Mohammad Babaee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrorismInternational lawPolitical scienceInternational tradeInternational securityInternational relationsLawNational securityBusinessPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Terrorism and terroristic system are among domestic, regional and international challenging problem in the first decade of the 21st century in the era when terrorism has turned from an individual threat to a global problem as a weapon to achieve national goals, specific groups have become no longer limited to national and regional borders and are gaining new concept and application (or they are trying to develop a new international purpose). It is feared that the spread of international peace and security in its all areas exposed to risk. In fact, the international communities felt the crisis and the danger and criminalizing this phenomenon after the attack on the twin towers of the world trade center on September 11, 2001 with unknown purposes in New York City [29] determining the failure of the international anti-terrorism strategies of these events, showed that anti-terrorism system is unsuccessful. So shortly after the attacks, the UN Security Council , recognizing the possibility of resorting to self-defense against international terrorism, subjects of international law again to pass the international anti-terrorism calls for conventions domestic laws to crack down terrorists.</p>

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceFrench-language works237,207