Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, the EU has faced global security trends, and challenges from strategic political, economic, energy and other nature.That means using appropriate toolbox of political, security, economic and other mechanisms.If Europe wants to be ready to respond and deal in appropriate way with major geopolitical shifts and defend its interests as well as to promote its vision for the future, then EU has to find appropriate mechanisms and develop political, economic and other toolbox to deal effectively with them.From other hand, the geopolitical trends are closely related to the internal rhetoric and the division among the member states of the EU into "old and new", ie "rich and poor".The economic, infrastructure and energy stability gap between Western Europe on the one hand and Eastern and Central Europe on the other is estimated at over € 500 billion in favor of Western Europe.Most of the Eastern and Central European members are making efforts to overcome this gap through various forms of regionalization and cooperation with third countries outside the EU.Additionally, the differences in understanding between the "old and new" members in terms of cooperation with China and Russia, as well as in terms of EU enlargement with the countries of Southeast Europe, ie with the countries of the Western Balkans are also a security, defense and political challenges to EU.The geopolitical trends, challenges and threats facing the EU are not only from military or territorial nature.At the same time, they are closely related with interdependence which is becoming increasingly conflictual and soft power is weaponized.Dealing with such trends, challenges and threats requires a fundamental change in understanding of security.Europe cannot afford to treat its security as 'business as usual' by repeating the same slogans and sticking to the same mind-set.Europe cannot afford to be a bystander in a hyper-competitive world, and world order that is mainly shaped by others.In order to build a common approach to all open issues of mutual interest to all members, the EU has adopted the Strategic Compass.The Compass is a guide for action and sets policy orientations, specific goals and objectives in four work strands: act, secure invest and partnership.More specifically, with the four domains, the EU cover crisis management and the EU's ability to respond as quickly as possible to civil emergencies, in building resilience and protection against hybrid warfare and cyber threats, to protect European interests on land, at sea and in space.It also focuses on strengthening European partnerships in security and defense, particularly with NATO, the OSCE, the African Union, the United States and Canada.With the Strategic Compass, Member States are making an effort to project itself as a respective force on the world stage through set out a common strategic vision for EU security and defence for the next decade.The idea is to determine the ambitions of European security and defense by 2030.The goal is Europe to be powerful in the world, fully sovereign, free to choose and control its own destiny.The Compass propose 49
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".