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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adler, E. & Barnett, M. 1998. Security Communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bennett, A. & George, A. L. 1997. `Case Study Methods and Research on the Democratic Peace', paper presented at the American Political Science Association Convention, Washington, August. Boulding, K. 1979. Stable Peace. Austin: University of Texas Press. Deutsch, K. W. et al. 1957. Political Community and the North Atlantic Area. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Ericson, M. `The Liberal Peace Meets History: The Scandinavian Experience', paper presented at the annual meeting of the International StudiesAssociation, Toronto,March 1997. Goodby, J. 1998. Europe Undivided: The New Logic of Peace in U.S.^Russian Relations. Washington: USIP Press. Katzenstein, P. J. 1976. Disjoined Partners: Austria and Germany since 1815. Berkeley: University of California Press. Lindgren, R. E. 1959. Norway^Sweden: Union, Disunion, and Scandinavian Integration. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rock, S. R. 1989. Why Peace Breaks out. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Rock, S. R. 2000. Appeasement in International Politics. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky. Russett, B. M. 1963. Community and Contention: Britain and American in the Twentieth Century. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Shamir, S. 1992. U.S. Institute of Peace Journal 5(6). Washington: USIP Press. Willis, F. R. 1965. France, Germany, and the New Europe, 1945^1963. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Yesson, E. G. 1995. `Sovereignty, Domestic Politics, and Stable Peace', revised version of paper presented at the APSA annual meeting, September.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it