MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808755914 · doi:10.3138/gsi.12.1.04

The Argentine Military and the <i>Antisubversivo</i> Genocide: The School of Americas' Contribution to the French Counterinsurgency Model

2018· article· en· W2808755914 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khatchik DerGhougassian, Leiza Brumat

Bibliographic record

VenueGenocide Studies International · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Relations in Latin America
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDictatorshipHuman rightsLatin AmericansPolitical scienceDemocracyGenocideAdministration (probate law)LawEconomic historyForeign policyPolitical economySociologyHistoryPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyzes the role of the United States during Argentina's 1976–1983 military dictatorship and their genocidal counterinsurgency war. We argue that Washington's policy evolved from the initially loose support of the Ford administration to what we call “the Carter exception” in 1977–79, when the violations of human rights were denounced and concrete measures taken to put pressure on the military to end their repressive campaign. However, with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 and the end of the détente, human rights lost importance in Washington's foreign policy agenda. The Argentine military briefly recovered US support with Ronald Reagan in 1981, only to soon lose it with the Malvinas War. Argentina's defeat turned the page of the US upport to military dictatorships in Latin America and marked the debut of “democracy promotion.”

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)0.001
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 score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenocide Studies InternationalSame topicInternational Relations in Latin AmericaFrench-language works237,207