MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7139414783

Pakistan

2008· article· W7139414783 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Country Profile

Bibliographic record

VenueJMU Scholoraly Commons (James Madison University) · 2008
Typearticle
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicWar, Ethics, and Justification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventionGovernment (linguistics)Action (physics)Human rights
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pakistan is not a signatory of the Ottawa Convention but is a member of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. Funding for mine action is difficult in Pakistan because the Mine Ban Convention was not ratified; consequently, prospective donors are less likely to invest in Pakistan’s landmine removal and victim-assistance endeavors. The lack of financial support as well as support from the government has made mine action—and specifically victim assistance—very difficult. The government’s stance is that landmines are important for the country’s security, especially along the borders of Afghanistan and India where disputes over land continue.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3030.166

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMU Scholoraly Commons (James Madison University)Same topicWar, Ethics, and JustificationFrench-language works237,207