MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3101686501 · doi:10.6000/1929-4409.2020.09.77

Protection the Culture of Peace in International Law

2020· article· en· W3101686501 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Haider Adham Abdulhadi, Salwan Jaber Hashim, Jaafar Naser Abdulridha

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Criminology and Sociology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Issues and Policies in Latin America
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKazan Federal University
KeywordsPolitical scienceLaw and economicsInternational lawTreatyScope (computer science)LawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is difficult to deny the importance of having a set of treaty legal rules that provide an appropriate legal framework for the protection of a culture of peace as long as we recognize that armed conflicts are international or non-international but are the product of intellectual convictions adopted by people in specific historical stages that contribute in one way or another to making the present and producing the future. Therefore, it is important to research in the areas of international protection for a culture of peace by first identifying aspects of the legal framework regulating the subject of the research, and then explaining the mechanisms of international protection, provided that the beginning begins with the definition of what is meant by a culture of peace, since defining the aforementioned concept will entail an important result related to determining the scope of the research Within the framework of the rules of general international law, and in light of goal (16) of the declared goals of the United Nations to achieve sustainable development where the focus is on encouraging the existence of human societies that believe in comprehensive peace for all as an effective tool to reach the concept of sustainable development as well as the possibility of resorting to A judiciary so that the realization of this aspect becomes available to all, and to establish, at all levels, effective institutions that are accountable, which requires envisioning a kind of complementarity between national frameworks that are supposed to cultivate faith in peace, coexistence, and respect for all human values ​​despite the differences and diversity on the one hand and the frameworks. The international community that seeks to promote reaching the same goals on the other hand, according to clear legal perceptions, wherever the first steps are confident and based on sound and realistic foundations applicable in practice, the goal of reaching the final goals will be more feasible than imagined.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.071
Scholarly communication0.0190.017
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0090.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Criminology and SociologySame topicSocial Issues and Policies in Latin AmericaFrench-language works237,207