CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 113Nuclear Issues and DefenseEuropean and Russian Geopolitical Military StrategiesDefense, Military, and Policy Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Is nuclear war more likely after Russia’s suspension of the New START treaty?

Tollefson, Jeff·2023·Nature
DOI 10.1038/d41586-023-00679-w
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/d41586-023-00679-w

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 113

Metadata

Authors
Tollefson, J.
Corresponding author
Tollefson, Jeff
Venue
Nature
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2023-03-07
Volume
615
Issue
7952
Pages
386-386
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
DOI
10.1038/d41586-023-00679-w
OpenAlex
W4323350609
Cited by
113
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 106
FWCI
111.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Nuclear Issues and Defense
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › European and Russian Geopolitical Military Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Defense, Military, and Policy Studies
Keywords
New START treaty, treaty withdrawal, nuclear arms control, nuclear war risk, nuclear nonproliferation, Russia
MeSH terms
International Cooperation, Nuclear Warfare, Russia, Nuclear Weapons

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review