MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

СИСТЕМА КОНТРОЛЮ ЗА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЮ РОЗВІДУВАЛЬНОГО СПІВТОВАРИСТВА КАНАДИ

2016· article· uk· W2941443625 on OpenAlex
В. Г. Верещак

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

VenueThe Scientific Issues of Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University Series pedagogy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageuk
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary, Security, and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceNational securityParliamentPoliticsPublic administrationWorld communityLawPublic relationsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current military and political situation around Ukraine and immediately in it has considerably intensified the problem of providing its military security. Therefore, the decision of the national command authorities of our country to join the EU, to intensify cooperation with NATO and accession to it in the nearest future has become very significant. Much attention is given to reforming and adaptation of the special services and agencies to the NATO standards. However, the issue of intensifying control over their activity is missing. Considering experience of many countries, it poses a danger. Here, the experience of Canada as the country, which is one of the most successful and supportive to Ukraine, can be useful.Canada focuses much on providing and supporting national and regional security and interests in a current, very hard military and political situation. Trying to counter possible threats and challenges by preventive measures, this country has got a series of special services and agencies putting them together as the Intelligence Community. The Intelligence Community functions within the existing legal framework. First of all, it is based on the Laws on the Canadian National Defence, on the Information Security and an on Privacy and a number of others.At first, it became necessary to intensify control over the activity of national special services and agencies of Canada at the end of the 70s of the 20th century when they abused their power against Que- bec National Liberation Movement. Indignation and protests of the public considering their authorities excessive, led the parliament’s taking adequate measures: to adopt several special laws and decrees, to form a number of committees, commissions and special bodies designed to control the activity of special services and agencies, their observation of national laws and human rights.Besides national control, the Canadian special services and agencies have their own (departmen- tal) codes of honour authorizing their officers to be wotrthy a given right to serve to the nativeland in the respective special departments and observe current national laws. The bright example of such a code is the Canadian Communications Security Establishment Ethics Charter.Thus, the Canadian special services and agencies (Intelligence Community) function within the legal framework under the control of respective supervising and overseeing agencies, institutions and commissioners which can be a model for our state.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.269 · 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