MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382581889 · doi:10.20901/pm.60.2.04

The Failure of The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict Resolution

2023· article· en· W4382581889 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Davor Boban, Iva Blažević

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitička misao · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPost-Soviet Geopolitical Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMediationArmenianMandateConflict resolutionPolitical scienceQuarter (Canadian coin)LawAncient historyHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict began in 1988 after the regional Supreme ‎Council declared the transfer of the region from the Azerbaijani SSR to the‎ Armenian SSR. The full-scale war started in 1992 after the dissolution of the‎ USSR and ended with the May 1994 armistice. In the following quarter century,‎ a peaceful resolution of the conflict was mediated by OSCE’s Minsk Group in ‎a form of facilitative mediation. The warring sides have never reached a final ‎solution and a new war started in the autumn of 2020. This paper examines how ‎facilitative mediation was conducted by the Minsk Group and why it eventually ‎failed. The conclusion of this paper is that the combination of the weak mandate‎ and the co-chairs’ separate and incongruous interests in the Caucasus resulted in ‎the failure of the conflict resolution in Nagorno-Karabakh.‎

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitička misaoSame topicPost-Soviet Geopolitical DynamicsFrench-language works237,207