Reliable knowledge claims on the recruitment and use of children: An empirical perspective
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The risks of child recruitment by non-state armed groups are geographically, temporally and contextually situated. There are multilayered, multivariate arrays of risk factors associated with non-state armed groups, with conflicts, and with contexts. Using Bayesian network modelling with a global dataset of non-state armed group child recruitment practices between 2010 and 2022, we demonstrate the theoretical and practical importance of adopting a situational perspective to understand child recruitment risks. Methodologically, we demonstrate a robust model-checking process that checks the adequacy of our data, the magnitude and direction of estimated effects, and shows greater than 80% accuracy in predicting child recruitment by non-state armed groups. We review and contrast our approach with standard general linear modelling used in quantitative child recruitment research over the past two decades. Through adopting a situated orientation, and applying analytical tools appropriate to that orientation, we challenge and extend existing theory and propose new theoretical insights on child recruitment risks. We show how important violence is as a predictor of child recruitment risks and, using a new measure of fighting force efficacy, show that, contrary to published theory, less effective non-state armed groups were more likely to recruit children than more effective ones. But even these most notable results we show to vary markedly across situations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it