Bibliographic record
Abstract
XVII INTERNATIONAL AMALDI CONFERENCE OF ACADEMIES\nOF SCIENCES AND OF NATIONAL SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES\nON SCIENTIFIC PROBLEMS OF GLOBAL SECURITY\n(DESY, Hamburg, 14-16 March 2008)\n\nSummary\n\nThe XVII International Amaldi Conference took place on the campus of the German Electron Synchrotron (DESY) in Hamburg under the auspices of the Hamburg Academy of Sciences and at the joint invitation of the president of the Union of German Academies of Sciences and of the Chair of the Amaldi Conferences at the Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei in Rome, Prof. Edoardo Vesentini. Organisational support was given by the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg, the Center for Science and Peace Research of the University of Hamburg, and by DESY. Sponsors were the Stifterverband für die Deutsche Wissenschaft, die Stiftung Friedensforschung and the Alfred Toepfer Stiftung.\n\nSixty scientists and scholars from 15 countries (Canada, China, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Iran, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea (South), Norway, Poland, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States) attended the three-day conference. \n\nIn honour of Prof. Wolfgang K. H. Panofsky, co-founder of the Amaldi Conferences who passed away on September 24, 2007, the conference was opened by a newly established “Panofsky Lecture” delivered by his old friend and long-standing associate in arms control and government advising activities, Richard L. Garwin.\n\nThe topics on the agenda were:\n\n 1. Nuclear Policies of the Nuclear Weapon States,\n\n 2. Safe Fuel Supply for Civilian Nuclear Power Stations and the Risk of Nuclear Proliferation. The Future of Non-Proliferation, \n\n3. The Risk of Nuclear Terrorism,\n\n4. New Military Technologies such as Directed Energy Weapons.\n\nAlso discussed were \n• problems of offering independent scientific advice in questions of security policy,\n• the role of the nuclear option in regional conflicts,\n• methods of detection of clandestine nuclear activities,\n• options for the future of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons.\n\nApart from the presentation of papers there was a panel discussion on these topics.\nA special feature of the conference was the participation of young scientists who served as rapporteurs on the results of the individual sessions, thereby having the opportunity to give an assessment of the problems and the suggested solutions from the point of view of the younger generation. This novelty was widely acclaimed, was recommended for perpetuation in future Amaldi Conferences and is hoped to contribute to a permanent regeneration of the Amaldi Conferences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.566 | 0.372 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier 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".