MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2591219225 · doi:10.1177/0020702017695215

Truth and reconciliation in Southeast Asia and the Melanesian Pacific: Potential Canadian contributions and potential lessons for Canada

2017· article· en· W2591219225 on OpenAlexaffabout
David Webster

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPeacebuilding and International Security
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeacebuildingTimor lesteCommissionSoutheast asiaPolitical scienceAction (physics)EthnologySociologyPublic administrationLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent experiences with truth and reconciliation processes in Southeast Asia and the Southwest Pacific suggest that there is a role for historical research and memory in helping to build sustainable peace and stability in new nations—and conversely, that ignoring violent pasts undermines peacebuilding efforts. Two truth commissions have operated in this region, in Timor-Leste (East Timor) and Solomon Islands. There are also calls for truth and reconciliation processes in Indonesia at the national and local levels, including in (West) Papua. As the only Western developed country to have held a full truth commission, Canada could play a powerful role in promoting and supporting mutual dialogue on the implementation of truth and reconciliation outside its borders. We can derive both potential lessons and recommendations for Canadian action to promote truth and reconciliation processes from the cases of Indonesia, Solomon Islands, and Timor-Leste.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0280.011
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy AnalysisSame topicPeacebuilding and International SecurityFrench-language works237,207