MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183418823 · doi:10.52074/skyhawk.v1i1.10

Diplomacy Review of Delegation of Republic of Indonesia to the International Civil Aviation Organization in Montreal Canada

2021· article· en· W3183418823 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Afen Sena, Ahmad Hariri, Genny Luhung Prasojo, Prasetyo Iswahyudi

Bibliographic record

VenueSKYHAWK Jurnal Aviasi Indonesia · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiplomacyDelegationCivil aviationPolitical scienceCivil servantsPublic administrationThe RepublicAviationLawEngineeringPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is an important institution that mandates the world's civil aviation authorities to play a role in reforming Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) of civil aviation. SARPs are the main reference for all parties related to the issue of international civil aviation. Indonesia's relationship and cooperation with the ICAO is therefore, important and should be a priority. ICAO is an organization where Indonesia is able to protect and defend its national interests. Relations and cooperation with ICAO are priorities in order to help and improve Indonesian civil aviation safety and security. This study was based on observations made by the Permanent Delegation of Republic of Indonesia on the diplomatic role played in ICAO during 2020 by studying the latest aspects of ICAO governing bodies, development of specific issues, pending issues and follow-up of Indonesia diplomatic role in ICAO. In general, the aim of the diplomatic role in ICAO is focused on supporting the achievement of three items; 1) securing Indonesia's national interest in international civil aviation cooperation; 2) support international civil aviation programs and issues that are ICAO's priority; and 3) improve Indonesia's position in ICAO, especially in order to prepare for Indonesia's candidacy to the ICAO Council.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSKYHAWK Jurnal Aviasi IndonesiaSame topicInternational Law and AviationFrench-language works237,207