MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407883268 · doi:10.5771/9780810862630

Historical Dictionary of NATO and Other International Security Organizations

2008· book· en· W4407883268 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marco Rimanelli

Bibliographic record

VenueRowman & Littlefield Publishers eBooks · 2008
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary and Defense Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceInternational securityComputer securityComputer sciencePublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is a military alliance established by the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty on April 4, 1949. The treaty was signed by Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxemburg, France, United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland. Today there are a total of 26 countries that belong to NATO. The Historical Dictionary of NATO and Other International Security Organizations covers the Atlantic Alliance's origins, structure and organization through a list of acronyms and abbreviations, a chronology, an introductory essay, a bibliography, and over 1,000 cross-referenced dictionary entries on its Secretaries-Generals, its Supreme Allied Commanders-Europe, plus all affiliated organizations created to enhance NATO's reach in a broader Euro-Atlantic security architecture (e.g. North Atlantic Consultative Council, Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, NATO-Russia Charter; NATO-Ukraine Charter, and NATO-Mediterranean Dialogue Partners). This book also covers other related regional organizations with security responsibilities in Europe and worldwide where they interact with NATO, either currently (e.g. ANZUS, ASEAN, European Union, Organization of African Unity, Organization of American States, Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe, and United Nations) or in the past (e.g. CENTO, European Defence Community, SEATO, Warsaw Pact, and Western European Union).

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)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRowman & Littlefield Publishers eBooksSame topicMilitary and Defense StudiesFrench-language works237,207