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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.005 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".