Bibliographic record
Abstract
The common assumption that runs through most contemporary western approaches to fostering peace and stability between combatants in war-torn regions is that peace is a bottom-up process. The impetus for peace, they assume, is not from states but from their societies. Peace is achieved, therefore, by creating common interests and identities between the populations and key societal interest groups in the combatant societies, and then forging political institutions that allow society to restrain aggressive leaders. In other words, the path to peace consists of creating cooperative international institutions, fostering economic interdependence, and encouraging democratization. In this regard, the western approach to peacemaking fits squarely in the liberal and constructivist traditions of international relations theory and, in particular, the traditions of institutionalism, commercial liberalism, and democratic peace theory. It also is based on the analogy of peacemaking in Western Europe after World War II, which many interpret to be the result of the creation of a pluralistic security community based on common democratic regimes, extensive economic interdependence, and cooperative European institutions. Consequently, they recommend that the way to spread peace and stability to troubled regions, such as the Middle East and South Asia, is to promote democratization, economic interdependence, and liberal regional institutions to create a similar community in those regions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.007 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".