The US Geopolitical Codes and Its Influences on the US-Iran Relations: The Case of George W. Bush’s Presidency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper attempts to explain the US-Iran political relations from the geopolitical perspective. It focuses on George W. Bush’s presidency as a remarkable period in two states’ relations. Concentrating on the US geopolitical codes, this work aims to study the political leaders’ beliefs and also the influences of these ideas on the states’ foreign policy. The research also stresses on some of the world’s geopolitical changes in the geopolitical world order context. With the end of Iran-Iraq war, inimical relation of the US-Iran was promoting, and it even entered a more critical phase with the occurrence of changes in the US foreign policy towards Iran, when Bush was elected as the US president in 2001 and especially after September 11th attacks. At this point, Iran was introduced as an “axis of evil” and this asseveration strengthened hostility between the two countries. With the election of Ahmadinejad as Iran’s president in 2005, Iran’s political behavior also underwent drastic changes. As a result, both countries, based on their leaders’ beliefs, pursued their policies in the regional and global level to access to different objectives, in line with the ideas that had been derived from their geopolitical-ideological assumptions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".