MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2572199455 · doi:10.1162/jcws_a_00678

The Limits of Compensation: Swiss Neutrality Policy in the Cold War

2016· article· en· W2572199455 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
TopicCommunism, Protests, Social Movements
Canadian institutionsInternational Development Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeutralityCollective securityPolitical sciencePolitical economyWorld War IIPoliticsCorporate governanceEconomyDevelopment economicsLawSociologyEconomicsInternational relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Switzerland was in a unique place among European countries after World War II. Although situated in the center of Europe, it had not been attacked by Nazi Germany and therefore emerged from the war with a strong economy, stable political institutions, and social cohesion. The experience of World War II forged a collective identity different from that in other continental states. The Swiss had a deep emotional commitment to neutrality and a conviction that autonomous defense would continue to be an effective security strategy after 1945. The Swiss government acknowledged the need for, and indeed was supportive of, the new United Nations collective security system. The Swiss were well aware of the benefits of Western collective defense and European integration as the Cold War divide came about. But Switzerland was willing to associate with these new multilateral governance structures only to the extent that they did not negatively affect neutrality or, in the case of European integration, Swiss economic interests.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.302 · 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