<i>Compensation to Palestinian Refugees and the Search for Palestinian–Israeli Peace</i>Edited by Rex Brynen and Roula El-Rifai
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Compensation to Palestinian Refugees and the Search for Palestinian-Israeli Peace is a compilation of essays by technical experts who seek to preserve the research, documentation, and analysis that has been conducted in the absence of an on-going ‘peace process’, given the international community’s extensive ‘knowledge management’ problem as well as the lack of documentation of many track two and dialogue projects (p. 7). The volume’s contributors include experts from think tanks, universities, and international organizations, not only Palestinians and Israelis, but also high level researchers and consultants from other countries in the Middle East, Europe, and North America, who were coordinated by Canada’s International Development Research Center’s (IDRC) Expert and Advisory Services Fund (EASF). The book, which includes some highly specialized chapters, is aimed primarily at negotiators and policy makers, but it is also of relevance to those who research the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and those studying the question of refugees in other conflicts. The authors in the volume hope that ‘research, analysis and reflection on these compensation issues—in all their complexity—might serve not only to facilitate future negotiations, but also to help assure that any agreements that are reached have optimal and sustainable consequences, both for regional peace and for the refugees themselves’ (p. 279). They assert that although the question of refugee compensation may not be a sufficient condition for reaching a peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians, it is a necessary one, and one that is ‘intimately bound up with the broader elements and dynamics of the conflict’ (p. 2).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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".