ScholarGate
Asisten

Bandingkan metode

Tinjau metode pilihan Anda berdampingan; baris yang berbeda akan disorot.

Machine Learning Conflict Prediction×Dyadic Conflict Analysis×
BidangInternational RelationsInternational Relations
KeluargaMachine learningProcess / pipeline
Tahun asal20161992
PencetusPredictive conflict research (e.g., Muchlinski, Siroky, He & Kocher)Stuart A. Bremer (and the Correlates of War dyadic tradition)
TipeSupervised machine-learning prediction of conflictObservational research design for interstate conflict
Sumber perintisMuchlinski, D., Siroky, D., He, J., & Kocher, M. (2016). Comparing random forest with logistic regression for predicting class-imbalanced civil war onset data. Political Analysis, 24(1), 87–103. DOI ↗Bremer, S. A. (1992). Dangerous dyads: Conditions affecting the likelihood of interstate war, 1816–1965. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 36(2), 309–341. DOI ↗
AliasML Conflict Prediction, Random Forest Civil War Prediction, Algorithmic Conflict Prediction, Supervised Learning for Conflict OnsetDyad-Year Analysis, Dyadic Design in Conflict Studies, Dangerous Dyads Analysis, Pairwise Interstate Conflict Analysis
Terkait33
RingkasanMachine learning conflict prediction uses flexible supervised algorithms — random forests, gradient boosting, neural networks, regularized regression — to forecast the onset of armed conflict from large sets of features, prioritizing out-of-sample predictive accuracy over coefficient interpretation. Muchlinski, Siroky, He, and Kocher (2016) showed that random forests substantially outperform logistic regression at predicting class-imbalanced civil-war onset, catalyzing a shift in conflict research toward algorithmic prediction, rigorous out-of-sample validation, and the recognition that explanation and prediction are distinct goals.Dyadic conflict analysis is the dominant research design in quantitative conflict studies: it treats the pair of states (the dyad), observed year by year, as the unit of analysis and models the probability that a pair experiences militarized conflict as a function of their joint and individual attributes. Stuart Bremer's 'Dangerous Dyads' (1992) is the canonical statement, identifying which conditions — contiguity, the absence of alliance, power parity, the absence of joint democracy, and others — make a pair of states war-prone. The design aligns conflict data with the relational theories that dominate the field.
ScholarGateSet data
  1. v1
  2. 1 Sumber
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 1 Sumber
  3. PUBLISHED

Ke halaman pencarian Unduh salindia

ScholarGateBandingkan metode: Machine Learning Conflict Prediction · Dyadic Conflict Analysis. Diakses 2026-06-24 dari https://scholargate.app/id/compare