MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034699518 · doi:10.5038/1944-0472.13.2.1796

Iran: Asymmetric Strategy and Mass Diplomacy

2020· article· en· W3034699518 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Strategic Security · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia Studies and Communication
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiplomacyInformation warfarePolitical scienceDoctrineThe InternetMass mediaComputer securityNational securityMilitary strategyPolitical economyPublic relationsInternational tradeComputer scienceLawBusinessSociologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an analysis of Iran’s information and mass diplomacy efforts in terms of its use of traditional written and audio-visual media, as well as through internet-based ones. Iran’s information efforts are both at the centre of its national strategy in dealing with its adversaries and its domestic policies to maintain and protect the regime. Furthermore, it is also well-aligned with the overall Iranian doctrine to take 360 degree approach to security, while avoiding direct military confrontation. A better understanding of Iran’s approach and inherent logic behind its information warfare can help anticipating the country’s next move.

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)0.001
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 score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.227 · 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