MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133564556 · doi:10.47814/ijssrr.v2i4.25

The Clash of Civilizations in the Syrian Crisis: Migration and Terrorism

2019· article· en· W3133564556 on OpenAlexaff
J. S. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Social Science Research and Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrorismCivilizationEthnic groupPolitical scienceEthnic conflictElitePolitical economyReligious pluralismSociologyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Syrian crisis can be the beginning of a new civilization conflict. Ethnic and religious pluralism is clearly evident in this country; Muslims: Sunnis, Duroz, Alawites, Shiites, and Ismailis; Orthodox Christians, Catholics, Maronites, Protestants, and Turkmen and Kurdish ethnic minorities. The Syrian crisis in 2011 appeared to be protesting against the ruling elite (Alawi). Due to the presence of various cultures and religions, it seems that this will make the Syrian crisis a prelude to a renewed clash of civilizations. The present research seeks to answer these questions: What are the basic propositions of the theory of the clash of civilizations and how is it represented in the Syrian crisis? Since according to Samuel Huntington, the foundation of civilizations, religious and cultural backgrounds, and cultural and religious identities are the main source of the clash of civilizations; Therefore, the war on terrorism, the Syrian crisis, the emergence of ISIL and the presence of the US military and international interventions, the competition of regional and trans-national powers, is express the clash of civilizations.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.412 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Social Science Research and ReviewSame topicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceFrench-language works237,207