MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924844568 · doi:10.2478/pce-2018-0019

Human Security: An Analysis of the Dissemination of an Idea in World Politics

2018· article· en· W2924844568 on OpenAlex
Šárka Waisová

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitics in Central Europe · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Peace and Security Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität BonnUniversity of PittsburghUniversity of East LondonUniversitat de BarcelonaAarhus Universitet
KeywordsHuman securityPoliticsSecurity studiesPolitical scienceInternational securityInternational relationsHuman rightsNational securityPublic administrationSociologyPublic relationsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The study considers the dissemination of the idea of human security including the means – trajectories and spaces – by which it has been spread and reproduced in international politics. My aim is to illuminate the agents behind this dissemination, the ways that the concept has been shared and the intellectual and institutional frameworks that have enabled its existence. I conclude that the idea of human security arose from the UN system, particularly the United Nations Development Programme’s offices. It was disseminated with the assistance of “human security friends,” i.e. Japan, Canada and Norway and several prominent scholars, high-ranking policy-makers and UN officers. Nevertheless, despite these efforts, human security has not found a following worldwide. It was embedded in part of the UN system where it has remained powerful and been reproduced. Outside the UN system, however, even its most active and devoted promoters have abandoned the concept. The number of these supporters has dwindled, the idea has lost its power and the spaces where it is reproduced are limited.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.328 · 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