Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zusammenfassung OSCE Insights ist die Nachfolgepublikation des vom Institut für Friedensforschung und Sicherheitspolitik (IFSH)an der Universität Hamburg herausgegebenen OSZE-Jahrbuchs. Renommierte ForscherInnen verfassen wissenschaftliche Analysen, DiplomatInnen und politische EntscheidungsträgerInnen berichten über ihre Erfahrungen und formulieren Empfehlungen für gemeinsame Sicherheit von Vancouver bis Wladiwostok. Die Beiträge untersuchen die institutionelle Entwicklung der OSZE, ihre Beziehungen zu anderen internationalen Organisationen und die Positionen von Teilnehmerstaaten gegenüber der OSZE. Darüber hinaus befassen sich die Autorinnen und Autoren mit Fragen der Demokratieförderung, der Menschenrechte, der Rüstungs-kontrolle, der Sicherheitssektorreform oder des Umweltschutzes im OSZE-Raum. Abstract OSCE Insights is the follow-up to the OSCE Yearbook published by the ISFH at the University of Hamburg. The articles in OSCE Insights shed light on OSCE-related topics from different perspectives. Renowned research-ers write academic analyses, and diplomats and political decision makers report on their experiences and formulate recommendations for common security from Vancouver to Vladivostok. The contributions examine the institutional development of the OSCE, its relations with other international organisations and the posi-tions of participating states towards the OSCE. In addition, the authors deal with questions of democracy pro-motion, human rights, arms control, security sector reform and environmental protection in the OSCE area.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.031 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.004 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".