MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2572059069 · doi:10.1162/jcws_a_00677

Introduction: Neutrality and Nonalignment in World Politics during the Cold War

2016· article· en· W2572059069 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cold War Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Geopolitical and Social Dynamics
Canadian institutionsInternational Development Research Centre
FundersSyddansk UniversitetHelsingin YliopistoStockholms UniversitetSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsNeutralityCold warPoliticsPolitical sciencePolitical economyForeign policyEconomic historyLawSociologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past two decades, research on Cold War neutrality has advanced rapidly. With the declassification of important archival collections, the image of the four European “classic” neutrals—Austria, Finland, Sweden, and Switzerland—has changed considerably. New facets have emerged in the understanding of how neutrality functioned as a part of the Cold War international system. In particular, the importance and connections of neutrality's domestic political and ideational dimensions in foreign policymaking has been stressed in the latest research on Cold War neutrality.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.425

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.280 · 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