The human in command : exploring the modern military experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Foreword M.K. Jeffery. Acknowledgments. 1. The Human in Command: A Brief Introduction R. Pigeau, C. McCann. Part I: The Command Experience. 2. The Nature of Command R.R. Crabbe. 3. The Human in Command: A Personal View S. Cherrie. 4. Command Experiences in Rwanda R.A. Dallaire. 5. The Fog of War: A Personal Experience of Leadership R.A. Lane. 6. Command and Control in Stressful Conditions P.L.E.M. Everts. 7. Command and Leadership in Other People's Wars M.D. Capstick. 8. Establishing Command Intent - A Case Study: The Encirclement of the Ruhr, March 1945 W.M. Connor. 9. Time, Tempo, and Command J.S. Labbe. 10. United States Army Leadership Doctrine for the Twenty-First Century J.P. Lewis, et al. 11. Human Problems in Organizational Devolution J. Penrose. Part II: The Science of Command. 12. Redefining Command and Control R. Pigeau, C. McCann. 13. Developing Practical Thinking for Battle Command J.J. Fallesen. 14. Command and Control: A Biased Combination? P.-A. Persoon, et al. 15. Mission Command in Ambiguous Situations A.L.W. Vogelaar, E.-H. Kramer. 16. Dynamic Decision Making in Command and Control B. Brehmer. 17. Self-Assessment of Command Performance and Feedback in Multiforce Training A. Mirabella, et al. 18. A Schema-Based Approach to Measuring Team Decision Making in a Navy Combat Information Center C. Paris, et al.19. Communication of Intent in Military Command and Control Systems G. Shattuck, D.D. Woods. 20. Misplaced Loyalties: Military Culture and the Breakdown of Discipline in Two Peace Operations D. Winslow. 21. Morale, Cohesion, and Confidence in Leadership: Unit Climate Dimensions for Canadian Soldiers on Operations P.J. Murphy, K.M.J. Farley. 22. Coping with Interrogations J.C. Laberg, et al. 23. Stressors Faced by Commanders in Three Operational Environments: The Gulf, Bosnia, and Northern Ireland G.M. Breakwell. 24. Training of Higher-Level Joint Commanders C. Jeffery, et al. 25. Relative Efficacy of an Open versus a Restricted Communication Structure for Command and Control Decision Making: An Experimental Study M. Omodei, et al. 26. Research Challenges for the Human in Command C. McCann, R. Pigeau. The Contributors. Index.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".