MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388699890 · doi:10.4324/9781003354130

Intelligence Oversight in Times of Transnational Impunity

2023· book· en· W4388699890 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Didier Bigo, Emma Mc Cluskey, Félix Tréguer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntelligence, Security, War Strategy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of Defense ProgramsVrije Universiteit BrusselAgence Nationale de la RechercheDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftMassey UniversityUniversity of WestminsterUniversity of OxfordTemple UniversityKing's College LondonUniversity of CambridgeWissenschaftszentrum Berlin für SozialforschungYork UniversityUniversity College LondonLondon School of Economics and Political ScienceEconomic and Social Research CouncilEuropean CommissionU.S. Department of DefenseHome OfficeHeinrich Böll StiftungVictoria UniversityPrinceton UniversityUniversity of Oklahoma
KeywordsImpunityPolitical scienceLaw and economicsLawSociologyHuman rights

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>This book adopts a critical lens to look at the workings of Western intelligence and intelligence oversight over time and space.</p><p>Largely confined to the sub-field of intelligence studies, scholarly engagements with intelligence oversight have typically downplayed the violence carried out by secretive agencies. These studies have often served to justify weak oversight structures and promoted only marginal adaptations of policy frameworks in the wake of intelligence scandals. The essays gathered in this volume challenge the prevailing doxa in the academic field, adopting a critical lens to look at the workings of intelligence oversight in Europe and North America. Through chapters spanning across multiple disciplines – political sociology, history, and law – the book aims to recast intelligence oversight as acting in symbiosis with the legitimisation of the state’s secret violence and the enactment of impunity, showing how intelligence actors practically navigate the legal and political constraints created by oversight frameworks and practices, for instance by developing transnational networks of interdependence. The book also explores inventive legal steps and human rights mechanisms aimed at bridging some of the most serious gaps in existing frameworks, drawing inspiration from recent policy developments in the international struggle against torture.</p><p>This book will be of much interest to students of intelligence studies, sociology, security studies, and international relations.</p><p><i>The Open Access version of this book, available at <a href="http://www.taylorfrancis.com">www.taylorfrancis.com</a>, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license.</i></p>

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.288 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 topicIntelligence, Security, War StrategyFrench-language works237,207