MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2477267050 · doi:10.1057/9780230277021_5

The Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe

2010· book-chapter· en· W2477267050 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lisa Watanabe

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Politics and Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceCompetition (biology)PactSecurity councilGeographyIntervention (counseling)LawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On 10 June 1999, the day that the United Nations Security Council Resolution No. 1244 mandating intervention in Kosovo was issued, the foreign ministers of the EU, Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Romania, the Russian Federation, Slovenia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), Turkey, the US, Canada, and Japan met in Cologne, Germany, with representatives from numerous international organizations, to formally endorse the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe. 1 As an EU initiative, the establishment of the Pact signified a new phase of the EU’s approach to the Balkans. Its earlier approach had been overwhelmingly reactive. It had also responded separately to successive crises in the Western Balkans rather than attempting to stabilize the region as a whole. The EU’s first attempt to remedy these deficiencies with a ‘Regional Approach’ failed to address comprehensively the causes of conflict and to capitalize on the stabilizing potential of the two EU candidate states, Romania and Bulgaria. The Regional Approach was, moreover, uncoordinated with other initiatives and programmes aimed at stabilizing the Balkans, producing overlap and, in some instances, competition. The SP represents an effort to overcome these shortcomings. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations30
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicEuropean Politics and SecurityFrench-language works237,207