MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754298266

A Community Worth Saving

2017· article· en· W2754298266 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kari Roberts

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of military and strategic studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCommunity Development and Social Impact
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current world order is under siege.While this may be a slight exaggeration, there are voices of discontent with the current international system, atop which sits the United Nations as its nucleus.For some, the international community is ill-equipped to address our most pressing challenges, notably the need to balance civil and human rights in an age of terrorism, fear, and division, and the need to protect refugees, who are the real victims of our collective inability to end war and violence.These pressing questions -and many others -are difficult problems for which no easy solution presents itself, but they all center on an important an overarching question: what kind of international community do we want?Like it or not, we live in interesting times, and for some, the current turmoil in the international system is evidence that existing structures have outlived their usefulness.There are some who would tell us, as they have always told us, that the international system is inherently weak, that the only assurance of wealth and survival is power.They would have us believe that the only currency in the international system is, and has always been, power.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0860.013

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 head0.211
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.113 · 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 designQualitative
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 routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of military and strategic studiesSame topicCommunity Development and Social ImpactFrench-language works237,207