MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399410625 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v17n3p10

Is Vladimir Putin a Realist with Special Attention to the Concept of a Force Monopoly and Hans Kelsen’s Principle of Effectiveness of Laws and Joe Biden’s (President of the United States of America) Speech at the United Nations General Assembly Meeting of 20th September, 2023 That There Will Be Reprisal against Russia for Starting the War with Ukraine Coincide with the Concept of Force Monopoly

2024· article· en· W4399410625 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Collins Udeh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Peace and Security Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawUse of forceInternational lawWrightMonopolyContext (archaeology)SociologyPoliticsPolitical scienceInterpretation (philosophy)Law and economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article I will take a critical analysis of realism especially political realism and linking it to Vladimir Putin (president of Russia) and then how the concept of force monopoly and Joe Biden’s (President of the United States of America) speech at the United Nations General Assembly meeting of 20th September, 2023 that there will be reprisal against Russia for starting the war with Ukraine coincide with the concept of force monopoly. Central to this discourse is the concept of force monopoly and the principle of effectiveness of law, these will be explored alongside entrenched norms of international law. Therefore, this article will examine the historical precedent set by the International Law; which unequivocally condemned acts of aggression and underscored the accountability of individuals for violating international law. Throughout World War II, it was widely believed that there is no justification for the hostilities initiated by Germany through Hitler therefore, Germany’s actions against states during the second world war constituted unlawful aggression (Sorensen 1968; Wright, 1947). This historical context serves as a backdrop for ensuring compliance with international legal norms and it emphasizes the imperative of holding states accountable to deter unlawful actions. Key topics addressed include the nuanced interpretation of force within international law, the parameters of self-defence, the principles of self-help and self-preservation, and the concept of necessity in justifying state actions. Through this multidimensional analysis, the study underscores the critical importance of upholding international legal frameworks to mitigate conflicts and foster a more stable and just global order.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.026
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicGlobal Peace and Security DynamicsFrench-language works237,207