MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899711189 · doi:10.29173/psur25

Religion in The Central African Republic Is Not the Problem, But Could be the Solution

2016· article· en· W2899711189 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Corbin Zoeteman

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitical Science Undergraduate Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeacebuildingDemocracyNationalityGovernment (linguistics)PoliticsPolitical sciencePolitical economyThe RepublicHistory of religionsDevelopment economicsSociologyLawReligious studiesEpistemologyImmigrationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the current conflict in the Central African Republic. I first outline the history of the region, beginning with its colonialization, showing that generations of its citizens have never experienced a stable and just government. I suggest this has lead its people to identify more with their religion instead of their collective nationality. Next I examine the religious undertones of the current conflict, emphasizing that religion is not the source of the problem, but rather a tool used by political factions to justify their destructive actions. I then examine religious peacebuilding exercises used in other conflicts and how they could be applied in the Central African Republic. Finally, I examine how religious leaders are already attempting to unite the country through religion. Overall I believe reconciliation between the factions is possible, and that peacebuilding exercises will lead to a stable and unified democratic government.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitical Science Undergraduate ReviewSame topicAfrican history and culture analysisFrench-language works237,207