ScholarGate
Assistent

Jämför metoder

Granska de valda metoderna sida vid sida; rader som skiljer sig är markerade.

Machine Learning Conflict Prediction×Dyadic Conflict Analysis×
ÄmnesområdeInternational RelationsInternational Relations
FamiljMachine learningProcess / pipeline
Ursprungsår20161992
UpphovspersonPredictive conflict research (e.g., Muchlinski, Siroky, He & Kocher)Stuart A. Bremer (and the Correlates of War dyadic tradition)
TypSupervised machine-learning prediction of conflictObservational research design for interstate conflict
UrsprungskällaMuchlinski, 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
Närliggande33
SammanfattningMachine 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.
ScholarGateDatamängd
  1. v1
  2. 1 Källor
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 1 Källor
  3. PUBLISHED

Gå till sökningen Ladda ner bildspel

ScholarGateJämför metoder: Machine Learning Conflict Prediction · Dyadic Conflict Analysis. Hämtad 2026-06-25 från https://scholargate.app/sv/compare