The Problems of Arab Solidarity and the Impact of Arab Spring on It: Study on the Model of the GCC Security
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The author presents a brief study of the Arab solidarity. Furthermore, From the point of view of the author the Arab cooperation is one of the most controversial topics in the Arab world, whereas this idea extends to the first history of the Arab countries, we can also mention the creation of the Gulf Cooperation Council, and then the Maghreb Union of Arab Countries. In this article, the topic of Arab solidarity will be presented, through the views of many thinkers, and based on many analytical researches of Arab public opinion, the view of Arab solidarity and analysis of many ideas put forward for this project. There are new positive ideas possibly can be implemented to achieve the Arab solidarity, which is still a very important project for a wide sector of Arabs, this analytical study will present the case of the Gulf Cooperation Council states as example of positive implementation of Arab solidarity. This article includes the results of Arab public opinion and shed the light on the Arab spring which affected many international and local events. The author asks if Arab solidarity will a real case in the future. This study will investigate these issues and provide the readers with a modern perspective on this topic, furthermore this research approaches this subject from three different areas of discussion: the realism approach, the functionalism approach, and the idealism approach.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 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".