Annual report from the Council to the European Parliament on the main aspects and basic choices of CFSP, including the financial implications for the general budget of the European Communities 2005. 10314/06, 8 June 2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Union Common Foreign and Security Policy in 2005.During this crucial and turbulent year continuous efforts have been made by the Member States and the EU institutions to purposefully and in a pro-active manner to address the main threats and challenges identified by the ESS working towards a truly common and consolidated CFSP.In order to deal successfully with growing complexity and the scale of the emerging threats and challenges the EU pursued its objectives through and in close cooperation with different multilateral organisations, principally the UN; with international organisations like OSCE and Council of Europe among others; with variety of regional organisations, and working at the same time very closely with partners and non-state actors.The ever-increasing range of topics on which the EU works together with the US, among them promotion of the democracy, Rule of Law and Human Rights worldwide, promotion of peace and security, prosperity, progress and good governance in the Middle East, Africa, on the Balkans and, non-proliferation and fight against terrorism bears testimony to the dynamism and vital character of the transatlantic partnership.The EU has also enhanced significantly its economic, political and cultural ties with Canada, Japan, India, China, Russia and many other countries. EUs External Action in the Fight against TerrorismThe fight against terrorism has been a constant main priority of the CFSP.The London bombings proved, as did the Madrid events before, that the EU and Member States are still steps behind the perpetrators of violence.In December 2005, the European Council adopted the European Union Counter-Terrorism Strategy which outlines the general framework of EU action in the field of counter-terrorism and is complemented by a detailed Action Plan.The European Council also adopted a Strategy for Combating Radicalisation and Recruitment to terrorism, concentrating on Islamist terrorism, which poses the most serious threat to Europe at this moment.IR/JT/aa 13 ANNEX DG E Coord EN Co-operation with the African Union and the African sub-regional organisations becoming more structured and intensive, through EU support both to the AU's AMIS II mission and to longer-term capacity building measures.The EU Strategy for Africa, which was adopted by the European Council in December 2005, puts a lot of emphasis on peace and security aspects and calls among others for a continued implementation of the ESDP Action Plan.In accordance with the EU action plan on the ICC, adopted in 2004, the EU continued working throughout 2005 to promote the Rome Statute and preserve its integrity.It made dmarches to third-country governments, in particular to promote ratification of the Rome Statute and restate the EU position against the conclusion of bilateral non-surrender agreements.In April 2005, the Council authorised the Presidency,
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".