The Impact of Concrete Wall Construction Between Iran and Afghanistan Border on Safety of Iran South-Eastern Marginal Regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Being located in the Middle East region, Iran is encountering fundamental challenges with regard to its safety. Loss of peace and safety in Afghanistan, existence of drug smuggling bands, weapons and entrance of terrorist troops from Afghanistan to Iran are the factors that continuously have endangered the security stability of Iran south-eastern marginal regions. In April 2009, the security wall construction plan between Sistan and Afghanistan common border was confirmed, and it was being fenced by military forces. Basically, the present research was intended to analyze marginal wall construction effects on safety of Sistan rural regions. To this end, a descriptive-analytical method was used based on secondary data, field studies and surveys. Size of the statistical society was determined as 375 households in 30 sample villages by considering the number of households in the villages using the Cochran formula. To analyze data ArcGIS software for spatial analysis, statistical methods of Wilcoxon in SPSS software were used in order to analyze changes in the security of the villages before and after wall construction. The research results indicated that concrete wall construction in Iran and Afghanistan border could lead to sustainable safety increment in villages of the Sistan region.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".