Uwarunkowania funkcjonowania NATO i Unii Europejskiej we współczesnym środowisku bezpieczeństwa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trying to diagnose contemporary and future security environment of the NATO and \nEU one should begin with identifying challenges and goals determining activities of \nthese two organization. Accordin to UN forecast the Word population tends do steadily \nincrease. Demographical changes applies also to Europe as existing social balance \nwould be undermined by growing old citizens, weakening national identity and reluctance to solve global challenges. Climate changes will bring not only global warming but inevitable geopolitical and economic consequences related to territorial borders and right to explore energy resources – oil and gas. The competition around the Arctic will involve a number of states such as US, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Russia. Another threat is the danger of new divisions in Europe resulting from the economic and civilization threats. Deepening the differences arising from such a state of affairs as well as the existing extremes of richness and poverty may bring about an escalation of social dissatisfaction, and as a consequence, internal destabilization of the states. That is the reason why both organization should upport the tendencies towards economic and political integration of Euroatlantic area countries as well as towards the development of active mutually profitable co-operation with the states and regions from beyond particular European camps and institutions. NATO and EU possess a number of tools, political and \nmilitary instruments that could face and manage crisis situation arising from dramatically changing security environment. Having mentioned above in mind the United States and European Union should enforce its strategic partnership
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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".