Bibliographic record
Abstract
What role should the United States military play in the Western Hemisphere during the next decade...unilateral hegemon or regional partner? 'Cooperative Security' is the regional engagement strategy that will dominate the coming decade as nation states in this hemisphere, and around the world, seek to compete and prosper in the new global environment. There is little doubt that the United States will remain the world's only superpower. The challenge of the future is how to empower international and regional organizations such as the United Nations, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the Organization of American States (OAS), and the Regional Security System (RSS) in the Caribbean, to accept a greater role in the mitigation and resolution of crisis within their respective spheres of influence. The downsizing of the U.S. Military and the implementation of a collective security strategy for the future, further implies that alliances and conflict resolution dominated by coalition warfare, will continue to be an integral component of the National Security Strategy of the United States. Revitalizing the entire spectrum of peacetime engagement programs now with the objective of empowering regional leaders to take a greater role in regional conflict resolution is one way to begin supporting this strategy. Collective security strategy will also require the U.S. to examine the current Unified Command Plan and impose changes designed to facilitate the integration of regional partners in the resolution of future conflicts. One such change for the Western Hemisphere should be the designation of an 'Americas Unified Command' replacing United States Southern Command. America's Command would encompass the entire Western Hemisphere including Canada and Mexico. The goal for these policy changes ultimately are well equipped and highly trained allies, capable of self-defense or providing military support anywhere in the hemisphere.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".