MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991613945 · doi:10.22151/politikon.19.3

Russia’s position towards the missile shield project

2013· article· en· W2991613945 on OpenAlexafffund
Irakli Gelukashvili

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitikon IAPSS Journal of Political Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Relations and Foreign Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsForeign policyPosition (finance)RealismPolitical scienceBalance (ability)Power (physics)Political economyPoliticsAsideMissile defenseMissilePerceptionLaw and economicsEconomic systemSociologyEpistemologyEconomicsLawPsychologyEngineeringPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Russian foreign policy (or the reaction of Russia on any phenomena) has been often analyzed only in terms of the balance of power, leaving aside the importance and scope of subjective and internal factors on its conduct. This article aims to demonstrate that Russia’s position towards the European missile shield reflects internal factors, as well as some subjective factors, which reflect the perceptions of Russian political leaders. More precisely, by analyzing Russia's position vis-à-vis the missile shield, we argue that subjective factors, such as leaders' perceptions, play a key role in the conduct of the Russian foreign and security policy. that the ontological and epistemological foundations of a neoclassical realist approach can help us to establish a logical and conscious process in our analysis. This can be explained in part by the fact that neoclassical realism focuses on internal factors to explain 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitikon IAPSS Journal of Political ScienceSame topicInternational Relations and Foreign PolicyFrench-language works237,207