MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W635060837 · doi:10.82308/52514

Choosing accommodation over confrontation : Syrian policy towards Israel 1991-2000

2003· article· en· W635060837 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dayana Paul Edde

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Peace and Security Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsAccommodationPolitical scienceLaw and economicsEconomicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The collapse of the Soviet Union and the rise of the United States to dominance marked the start of a new era in international relations. The need to study accommodation as a security strategy in the developing world stemmed from this major development. In this context, this thesis attempts to add to the growing literature on accommodative strategies by analysing the dynamics of accommodation in protracted conflicts in the developing world. The specific case selected in the search for insights is the evolution of Syrian policy towards Israel in the post-Cold War era. Three instances of attempted accommodation are studied: the Madrid Peace Conference (1991), the Wye Talks (1995), and the Shepherdstown Talks (1999). This thesis argues that the main explanatory factors for accommodation in this case are to be found in the external politico-military sphere. On the objective level, the role of powerful third parties and the changes in the opponent's policies particularly stand out. On the subjective level, external politico-military concerns, in the desire to avoid potentially permanent losses, appear to be the prime generator of accommodative moves.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicGlobal Peace and Security DynamicsFrench-language works237,207