MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404510564 · doi:10.1080/17502977.2024.2338697

Multitrack Diplomacy and Inclusion: Is Patchworked Peacemaking Really a Way Forward?

2024· article· en· W4404510564 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intervention and Statebuilding · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPeacebuilding and International Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiplomacyPeacemakingInclusion (mineral)Political sciencePeacebuildingSociologyPublic administrationLawSocial sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peacebuilding has undergone profound changes since 'multi-track' diplomacy was introduced. The multi-track model was intended to show that the different levels of peacemaking should support and encourage each other, but is increasingly challenged. The idea of Patchworked Peacemaking may encourage the different Tracks to build on each other's strengths. However, Patchworked Peacemaking will require the abilities and reflective ‘artistry’ of individuals in ways which may not conform to the requirements of social science. Patchworked Peacemaking thus likely has more relevance to process design at the operational sharp end than it does to the ongoing search for generalised and parsimonious models.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score0.562

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.354 · 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