MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109317987 · doi:10.1163/18750230-31010001

Analysis for Peace The Evolving Data Tools of UN and OSCE Field Operations

2020· article· en· W3109317987 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSecurity and Human Rights · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPeacebuilding and International Security
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forces College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploitField (mathematics)SoftwareComputer scienceData sciencePolitical scienceOperations researchComputer securityEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Both the United Nations and the osce are working to improve their peace operations technologically. While the emphasis is more often placed on new collection tools (e.g., satellite imagery, uav s, night-vision tools, etc.), the challenge remains to exploit the imagery and the copious other data that has been collected. By examining the software and evolving methods used by UN operations and the osce Special Monitoring Mission in Ukraine, we evaluate two often neglected steps of the information/intelligence cycle: analysis and dissemination. Lessons are drawn from both UN and osce experience in war-torn locations. Both organizations still need to establish strong and effective data-analysis and -sharing systems within their missions, and to find better ways to share information with the conflicting parties, and with humanitarian partners.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.277 · 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