MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089219462 · doi:10.5539/ass.v16n10p34

Diplomacy of International Crises Management: Kuwait Foreign Policy as a Model (A Survey Study)

2020· article· en· W3089219462 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Meshal Ahmed Al Mansour

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Relations and Crisis Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiplomacyForeign policyNegotiationInternational relationsArbitrationPhenomenonPoliticsPolitical scienceMediationPromotion (chess)Foreign policy analysisConflict managementCrisis managementPolitical economyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of the study of crisis management diplomacy stems from the fact that it is a tool to prevent and avoid all confrontations and its disastrous consequences. In particular, regional and international issues and crisis has become complex and multiple. In addition, the units of both regional and international environments have been increased. These developments further complicated the phenomenon of making and implementing foreign policy according to the mechanism of crises management diplomacy. As a result, making and implementing foreign policy in its traditional official framework has become insufficient to understand the nature of international relations. Rather, it has to be expanded outside of this framework to understand the role of crises management diplomacy in making foreign policy. Therefore, there have been some attempts to provide academic scientific frameworks to explain the process of making and implementing foreign policy according to the variables of this development. The study has monitored this matter and concluded that foreign policy, diplomacy and crises management diplomacy have significantly evolved from a simple and traditional phenomenon related to the issue of security and formal promotion of relations to multidimensional phenomenon closely related to the various economic, political, social and cultural areas of societies. This technique has been based on traditional methods such as negotiations. In recent decades, it has adopted accurate and effective technical methods. These methods include political methods such as good offices, mediation and compromise. Also, there are legal methods such as international arbitration and the presentation of disputes to international and regional organizations. There are also deterrent ones such as economic embargo, boycotting and freezing funds. It means that developed countries control over international relations, and developing countries participate effectively in order to preserve the rights of nations and interact fruitfully through dialogue and peaceful coexistence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicPublic Relations and Crisis CommunicationFrench-language works237,207