Compassionate Conservatism VS Bush Doctrine CONSERVATISME COMPATISSANT VS DOCTRINE BUSH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
George W. Bush compared his administration plan for Pre-September the 11th with Post-September the 11th and declared that the first one was designed for internal issues such as helping parents, developing good character in American children, and strengthening a spirit of citizenship and service in the United States; but the second era changed the ways that was planed for past. Defeating evildoers and bringing them to justice shaped the way United States has to pass. In contrast to pre-September the 11th which had been called conditions of peace; the new condition after September the 11th was recognised as war condition and was declared as necessary war that is necessity of United States’ future security and freedom of American children (Bush, 11 October 2001). This article is to study perspective of George W. Bush and his administration on security strategies of the United States in pre-September the 11th (Compassionate Conservatism) and post-September the 11th era (Bush Doctrine).Key words: Compassionate Conservatism; September the 11th; Bush Doctrine; Preventive War; United States; Security
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".