MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620392884 · doi:10.5539/ass.v13n6p20

The Effect and Role of Political Dialogue in Relations between Countries in the Region (with Emphasis on Iran and Tajikistan Model: SCO)

2017· article· en· W2620392884 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shahbandi Mahmoud

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCooperative Studies and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopoliticsPoliticsRelation (database)Context (archaeology)Position (finance)Political sciencePolitical economySociologyGeographyEconomicsLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within review of Iran and Tajikistan and conducted studies, one should take into account some considerations due to geopolitical position viewpoint. In this process, Tajikistan can be considered one of the strong and old cultures and one of the greatest regional civilizations, considering the type of change in its political atmosphere can develop its relation with Iran. Therefore, here. The dialogue is not merely under consideration, rather, the relation within the dialogue is considered at regional level. Reviewing components contributing in relation and political dialogue, objective and means of political dialogue, system analysis and theoretic knowledge and methodology based on political talk and their features in a regional context should be discussed to evaluate the circumstances of Iran and Tajikistan within social and political context for encouraging political dialogue through Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) as a regional political tool.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicCooperative Studies and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207