MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410659660 · doi:10.5040/9780761875239

Lebanese Forces

2018· book· en· W4410659660 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nader Moumneh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East Politics and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this book, author Nader Moumneh–a Canadian senior policy adviser of Lebanese descent– examines the research of the formation and evolution of the Christian resistance in Lebanon he performed as a graduate student at the American University of Beirut in the early 1990s. He has conducted hundreds of lengthy interviews with senior Lebanese Forces leaders who were thoroughly impressed by his communicative yet assertive personality, his scrupulous presentation of facts, his obsessive attention to detail, and most importantly, his unwavering determination to unveil behind-the-scenes events. Mr. Moumneh drew upon his self-acquired persuasion tactics and negotiation strategies to earn the Lebanese Forces’ trust and gain access to top secret, never-before published information. Since then, he has continually revised and expanded the manuscript to address the rapidly changing situation in Lebanon and the Middle East. The Lebanese Forces: Emergence and Transformation of the Christian Resistance has taken twenty-five years to produce and is unique in its own right. Mr. Moumneh’s work is not a typical re-telling of the Lebanese crisis, rather it is a magnificent blend of skillful craftsmanship, an unprecedented wealth of painstakingly referenced chronological research and now declassified intelligence information.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.010

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.282 · 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
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMiddle East Politics and SocietyFrench-language works237,207