Mine Action in Afghanistan: The Way Ahead
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the strategy for the Mine Action Programme for Afghanistan (MAPA), as the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is committed to the vision of a country free from landmines and explosive remnants of war (ERW), where people and communities live in a safe environment conducive to national development, and where landmine and ERW survivors are fully integrated in the society and thus have their rights and needs recognized and fulfilled. The Way Ahead paper provides a vision and establishes end goals for the Afghan mineaction programme that are consistent with Afghanistan’s Ottawa Treaty obligations. Moreover, the strategy paper was intended as a base for a detailed and costed plan called the “Plan for Action”, which would describe how the UNMACA and its implementing partners would conduct the MAPA over a three-year period. The Plan establishes specific targets and milestones, and describes how these targets would be achieved. The first Plan will cover the period 1385-1387. The GoA adhered to the Millennium Development Goals at the end of 2005, and engaged in the Afghanistan National Development Strategy (ANDS) in 2006. Consequently, additional benchmarks have been set for the MAPA, and UNMCA has undertaken a review of the strategic plan according to these new Influencing Factors, which will be reflected in the three year Portfolio for Mine Action.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".