The Policies of the Gulf Regimes in Facing of the Repercussions of the Arab Uprisings: With Application to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman Sultanate and Bahrain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study aims to scrutinize and analyze the Gulf regimes' policies in facing of the repercussions of the Arab uprisings. The research has selected four countries as case studies, which are Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman Sultanate and Bahrain. In this vein, the study seeks to answer the main question: to what extent the Gulf regimes succeeded in facing the repercussions of the Arab uprisings? To answer this question, the study adopts the theoretical framework of the functional-structural approach, which has been developed by Gabriel Almond. This approach contains four main functional requirements, which are: structure, function, performance style and capabilities. The study has focused on system performance and capabilities in order to analyze the outputs, capabilities and performance of the Gulf regimes, and the extent to which the interaction of these capabilities contributes to the stability of the political system and increase its ability to adapt to changing circumstances and challenges. The study has reached many findings, the most important of which is that the Gulf countries have had the ability to face the repercussions of the popular uprisings, leading to the decline of them.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".