Jordanian Foreign Policy in Confrontation with Extremism and Terrorism: The International Alliance Is a Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study aims at researching in the Jordanian foreign Policy in confrontation with extremism and terrorism through concentration on factors and determinates that pushed Jordan to enter the International Alliance in fighting terrorism, especially fighting Da’ish organization. Corresponding to that significance of the study appears through discussing the role of the foreign policy and its instruments in limiting the phenomenon of extremism and terrorism and the most important strategies that the states should follow in light of the internal and external environmental impacts in confronting extremism and terrorism within the preventive procedures and terrorist crises management. The study employed the method of decision making in achieving objectives of study and its questions where the main question emerged: what are the most important determinants of the Jordanian Foreign Policy in joining the International Alliance against the terrorism, especially fighting the organization of the Islamic State “Da’ish”? The study deduced a number of results from the most important of them is that: Jordan could take a group of procedures and arrangements at the level of the foreign policy through the period (2011-2017) in confronting extremism ant terrorism within activation of military, diplomatic and media instruments, where the economic instrument appeared from the weakest instruments of the foreign policy and a negative factor in the process of decision-making. The study proved that the joining of Jordan to the International Alliance to fight Dai’sh Organization as a result of great impact of the geographic determinant, and availability of the organization at geographic territories forming a strategic danger on Jordan. The study also recommended with the necessity of treating the social and economic problems as an important side and supporter in enhancing the instruments of the Jordanian Foreign Policy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".