MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389435156 · doi:10.4314/jpds.v14i2.4

Globalization and Terrorism in Nigeria: A Retrospective Reflection

2023· article· en· W4389435156 on OpenAlexaff
Chibuike E. Madubuegwu, Ambrose Oluchukwu Abaneme, Ohagwu Anthony Chinwe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Policy and Development Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsAmbrose University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrorismJihadismIslamState (computer science)SovereigntyPolitical scienceSociologyLawPolitical economyGeographyPoliticsIdeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nigerian sovereignty for more than a decade was challenged by the onslaught of Sunni Jihadism in the North-East. The Jihadist insurgency took a more frightening dimension with the emergence of Islamic State of West Africa Province, ISWAP in alliance with Jama’atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda Awati Wal-Jihad, otherwise known as Boko Haram in bid to Islamize a secular nation-state. This paper in retrospective sense examined the frightening reality and, argued that this absurdity is facilitated by global spread of Islamic extremism and terrorism. The discourse adopted qualitative research design to explore the relevance of secondary and non-participant observational sources of data collection and content-analyzed issues and enfolding events. The discourse revealed that well-coordinated suicide bombings of Louis Edet House, Nigeria Police Headquarters on June 16, 2011 and United Nations building on August 26, 2011 at Abuja, the Federal Capital, were visible manifestations of global terrorist links of Boko Haram with Al-Qaeda. And, subsequent pledge of allegiance to ISIL in March 2015 watershed the varicosity of global terrorism in Africa most populous country. In credence to these findings, the discourse suggested holistic review of national security strategy and operational

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designQualitative
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 venueJournal of Policy and Development StudiesSame topicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceFrench-language works237,207