MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2463287725 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v9n5p289

Hegemonic Challenges of Iran and Russia in the Transcaucasia Region

2016· article· en· W2463287725 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSecurity, Politics, and Digital Transformation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopoliticsHegemonyPower (physics)Position (finance)PoliticsMeaning (existential)Political scienceGeographyEpistemologyPhilosophyLawPhysicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Caucasus is perhaps best described as a mosaic of peoples ancient and modern intertwined across a complex, often inaccessible geography that has made it a crossroads linking not only east and west but equally north and south. The aim of this paper is to enhance the understanding of future Iran and Russia challenges in Transcaucasia. Russian post-Soviet geopolitics invokes Eurasianism as its inner rationale and meaning, as a greater good that imbues pragmatic, interest based politics with a sense of mission. Although Russia remains a strong regional power with firm position on international level it is still hard for Moscow to accept loss of the position of great power. The methodology of this research is descriptive-analytical and it attempts to give a geopolitical answer to the question that how Iran can gains a hegemony in the Transcaucasia region?

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.249 · 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