Primerjava Centra za varovanje in zaščito slovenske policije s primerljivimi izbranimi enotami po svetu : diplomsko delo visokošolskega študijskega programa Varnost in policijsko delo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
V uvodnem delu diplomskega dela je predstavljeno zakaj je varovanje državnih voditeljev in ostalih državnikov pomembno, kaksna je zgodovina nastanka enot za osebno varovanje in kaj bo sam cilj diplomskega dela. Glavna naloga je bila se osredotociti in diplomo izdelati v okviru postavljenih hipotez. V nadaljevanju so predstavljeni nekateri pojmi s podrocja varovanja. Nato so glede na javno dostopne podatke predstavljene službe za varovanje nekaterih pomembnih oseb in objektov izbranih držav. To so Center za varovanje in zascito slovenske policije,kanadska Royal canadian mounted police, indijske Special protection group, President's bodyguards, National security guard in oddelek delhiske policije, izraelski Shin Bet, nigerijska State security service, novozelandski Diplomatic protection service, filipinski Presidential security group, poljski Buiro ochrony rzadu, romunski Serviciul de protectie si paza, južnokorejski Presidential security service, svedski Sakerhetspolisen, vatikanska Svicarska garda ter United states secret service in Diplomatic security service Združenih držav Amerike. Službe so pod državo v kateri delujejo opisane tako, da je najprej opisana njihova zgodovina nastanka, nato pa se je ugotavljalo pod kaksno maticno telo spadajo, koliko služb ali enot za varovanje pomembni oseb v državi sploh je in katere funkcionarje varujejo. Po tem so službe za varovanje iz vseh izbranih tujih držav posamicno primerjane s Centrom za varovanje in zascito slovenske policije. Zakljucek diplomske naloge vsebuje potrditve oziroma zavrnitve na zacetku postavljenih hipotez. Ugotovljeno je, da službe za varovanje nekaterih pomembnih oseb in objektov razlicnih držav, z manjsimi odstopanji varujejo primerljive funkcionarje. Prav tako je lahko razbrano, da nimajo vse izbrane države le po eno taksno službo in, da niso razvrscene pod primerljiva maticna telesa.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".