The Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it