MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987599307 · doi:10.1080/01402390500031973

Reconstructing the Interagency Process after Iraq1

2005· article· en· W1987599307 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Donald R Drechsler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Strategic Studies · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary and Defense Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science CouncilU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsBureaucracyPublic administrationPeacekeepingPoliticsPresidential systemPolitical scienceState (computer science)LawWhite (mutation)DemocracyAdministration (probate law)ManagementSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cultural, structural and bureaucratic barriers between the Department of State and the Department of Defense prevented effective integration, particularly in the postwar planning phase of Operation ‘Iraqi Freedom’. In contrast, the postwar planning in Kosovo, under the PDD 56 interagency coordination process, could have served as a useful template for the political-military planning process to produce a unified political-military plan. Unfortunately, the corporate knowledge contained in PDD 56 did not seem to transfer between administrations. Iraq demonstrated that partial State-Defense integration, which occurred primarily at the highest levels, was insufficient for an undertaking of this magnitude. Many challenges still exist to integrate two diverse executive departments.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0190.014
Scholarly communication0.0130.009
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations13
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Strategic StudiesSame topicMilitary and Defense StudiesFrench-language works237,207