MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324350992 · doi:10.1093/psquar/qqac018

Defending Iran: From Revolutionary Guards to Ballistic Missiles <i>by Gawdat Bahgat and by Anoushiravan Ehteshami</i>

2023· article· en· W4324350992 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Juneau

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitical Science Quarterly · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign policyPolitical scienceAdversaryPower (physics)IdeologyState (computer science)Political economyCompetitor analysisPoliticsLawSociologyComputer securityManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Much has been written on Iran’s domestic politics and foreign policies to help guide policymakers. Nevertheless, the country often remains poorly understood. This book by Gawdat Bahgat and Anoushiravan Ehteshami, both respected experts, offers a timely and relevant synthesis of what is known and not known about Iran’s defense policy; it should become essential reading for scholars, students, and practitioners. The book covers extensive grounds. It dives into the domestic sources of Iran’s conduct, especially ideology and threat perceptions. It explains the structure of Iran’s security forces and, usefully, of its military-industrial complex—the target of much investment before and after the 1979 revolution. It also offers detailed chapters on the tools in Iran’s portfolio to deter its adversaries and project its power, especially its missile and space programs, its cyber capabilities, and its naval and drone forces. Several themes emerge. Often neglected in public debates, one of these is the issue of continuity in Iranian foreign policy. Much changed after 1979; Iran suddenly went from close partner to adversary to the United States. But as Bahgat and Ehteshami clearly explain, it is possible to identify important elements of continuity because of the permanent impact of structural pressures; the authors show that Iran is, in broad terms, a normal state in this sense. Iran was and still is, notably, an ambitious but insecure regional power surrounded by a high number of actual or potential competitors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitical Science QuarterlySame topicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceFrench-language works237,207