105 lines
7.3 KiB
YAML
105 lines
7.3 KiB
YAML
dataset_name: security_studies
|
|
description: The following are multiple choice questions (with answers) about security
|
|
studies.
|
|
fewshot_config:
|
|
sampler: first_n
|
|
samples:
|
|
- question: 'What are the frameworks of analysis within which terrorism has been considered
|
|
(as of 2020)?
|
|
|
|
(A) Competition between larger nations has resulted in some countries actively
|
|
supporting terrorist groups to undermine the strength of rival states. Terrorist
|
|
networks are extended patronage clubs maintained and paid for by their donor
|
|
states and are conceptualised as being like state actors, to be dealt with using
|
|
military force. (B) Globalization has enabled the internationalization of terrorist
|
|
activities by opening up their operational space, although coordination is still
|
|
managed from a geographical base. This suggests that terrorist groups are nationally
|
|
structured which means that terrorism cannot be considered in terms of a war
|
|
to be defeated militarily without having serious implications on the indigenous
|
|
population. (C) Terrorism can be viewed as a problem to be resolved by military
|
|
means (war on terrorism), by normal police techniques (terrorism as crime),
|
|
or as a medical problem with underlying causes and symptoms (terrorism as disease).
|
|
(D) Terrorism is viewed as a criminal problem. The criminalization of terrorism
|
|
has two important implications. Firstly, it suggests that terrorism can be eradicated
|
|
- terrorists can be caught and brought to trial by normal judicial proceedings
|
|
thereby removing the threat from society - and secondly, it suggests that preventative
|
|
crime techniques are applicable to prevent its development.'
|
|
target: "Let's think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia articles on security\
|
|
\ studies for help. (A) is wrong because it is not competition between larger\
|
|
\ nations that causes terrorism. \n(B) is wrong because globalization is not\
|
|
\ the cause of terrorism.\n(C) is correct because the US undertook the war on\
|
|
\ terrorism. \n(D) is wrong because preventative crime techniques will likely\
|
|
\ not end terrorism. The answer is (C)."
|
|
- question: 'Which of the following is the best lens through which to investigate the
|
|
role of child soldiers?
|
|
|
|
(A) Child soldiers are victims of combat that need re-education and rehabilitation.
|
|
(B) Children and their mothers are not active subjects in warfare and are best
|
|
considered as subjects in the private sphere. (C) Children are most often innocent
|
|
bystanders in war and are best used as signifiers of peace. (D) Children have
|
|
political subjecthood that is missed when they are considered as passive victims
|
|
of warfare.'
|
|
target: Let's think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia articles on security studies
|
|
for help. Child soliders as a political topic can be missed when they are considered
|
|
passive victims of warfare. The answer is (D).
|
|
- question: 'How can we best describe the relationship between the state-centric approach
|
|
and the concept of human security?
|
|
|
|
(A) There are such wide divisions within the human security framework regarding
|
|
the nature of threats and referent objects that no widely applicable comparisons
|
|
between state-centric approaches and human security can be drawn. (B) By adopting
|
|
the framework of human security, the limitations of the realist state-centric
|
|
approach become evident. Whilst human security defines the referent object as
|
|
the person or population, state-centric approaches prioritise the security of
|
|
the state, de-prioritizing the pursuit of human security. (C) The state-centric
|
|
approach to security is a faction of human security, usually defined within
|
|
the broad school of human security. By being state-centric this approach prioritises
|
|
the individual as the referent object in security studies. (D) Both the state-centric
|
|
and human-centric approaches to security are mutually exclusive and offer a
|
|
sufficient analytic framework with which to understand the international security
|
|
system. It is therefore the role of security analysts to determine which of
|
|
these substantial concepts is correct, and which should be discarded.'
|
|
target: Let's think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia articles on security studies
|
|
for help. Human security focuses on a person or population whereas state-centric
|
|
approaches focus on the state while deprioritizing human security. The answer
|
|
is (B).
|
|
- question: 'In order to become securitized, a threat must be presented in which of
|
|
these ways?
|
|
|
|
(A) As an existential threat that requires immediate and extraordinary action,
|
|
posing a threat to the survival of the state or to societal security. (B) As
|
|
requiring immediate and extraordinary action by the state, threatening the survival
|
|
of a referent object and therefore warranting the use of measures not normally
|
|
employed in the political realm. (C) As an urgent threat to the survival of
|
|
the referent object, so serious that it legitimises the employment of extraordinary
|
|
action in response. (D) As an urgent threat to the survival of the audience
|
|
that requires extraordinary or emergency measures.'
|
|
target: Let's think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia articles on security studies
|
|
for help. To be securitized, a threat must be an urgent threat to the survival
|
|
of the referent object. The answer is (C).
|
|
- question: 'What distinguishes coercive diplomacy from military force?
|
|
|
|
(A) Compellence is another term for coercive diplomacy, but covering a narrower
|
|
set of criteria; compellence covers those threats aimed at initiating adversary
|
|
action. A threat to coerce a state to give up part of its territory would count
|
|
as coercive diplomacy, as long as that threat proactively initiates action before
|
|
reactive diplomacy is taken. (B) Coercive diplomacy constitutes the threats
|
|
of limited force to induce adversary''s incentive to comply with the coercer''s
|
|
demands. It is an influence strategy that is intended to obtain compliance:
|
|
the use of force to defeat an opponent first does not count. It leaves an element
|
|
of choice with the target to comply, or to continue. (C) Military force, or
|
|
the threat of military force, utilises fear to achieve strategic objectives.
|
|
Coercive diplomacy is differentiated from this approach, because it does not
|
|
use fear as a tool for coercing an adversary. (D) Coercive diplomacy is employed
|
|
to use force but to limit its effects on the international community. Coercive
|
|
diplomacy is an aggressive strategy that is intended to obtain compliance through
|
|
defeat. It does not leave an element of choice with the target, the target either
|
|
being forced to comply or engage in conflict. It seeks to control by imposing
|
|
compliance by removing any opportunity for negotiation or concession.'
|
|
target: 'Let''s think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia articles on security
|
|
studies for help. Coercive diplomacy uses the threat of force to induce the
|
|
opponent to comply with demands. The answer is (B).'
|
|
tag: mmlu_flan_cot_fewshot_social_sciences
|
|
include: _mmlu_flan_cot_fewshot_template_yaml
|
|
task: mmlu_flan_cot_fewshot_security_studies
|