MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238171287 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14656689

Reporting sexual exploitation and abuse by UN peacekeeping personnel: a research proposal on community perspectives

2021· preprint· en· W4238171287 on OpenAlexaff
Kaila Mintz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Security, and Conflict
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeacekeepingImpunityPolitical sciencePublic relationsContext (archaeology)CriminologySexual abuseEconomic JusticeComplaintPsychologyHuman rightsPublic administrationPoison controlSuicide preventionLawMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Persons displaced by conflict are considered especially vulnerable to sexual abuse by peacekeepers. While the UN reports publicly on allegations of "sexual exploitation and abuse" by peacekeepers, it is widely acknowledged that under-reporting is a significant problem. Proposed qualitative research involving local civil society organizations and community leaders supporting victims in the context of displacement will elicit their perceptions on the barriers to, and challenges associated with, formal reporting. The planned study, set out as a proposal, will assess perceptions of current reporting structures and recent UN reforms regarding "community-based complaint reception and mechanisms." This will inform further research and consultations into the design of more appropriate reporting structures. The research's dissemination, linked to the Code Blue campaign's advocacy to end impunity for sexual violence by peacekeepers, will seek to convince UN decision-makers that systemic reforms are needed to ensure that victims have better access to appropriate support and criminal justice.

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)0.071
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0710.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0090.021
Scholarly communication0.0120.017
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGender, Security, and ConflictFrench-language works237,207