Bibliographic record
Abstract
On December 2, 1823, the fifth President of the United States, James Monroe, announced the most important declaration regarding American foreign policy. His seventh annual message to Congress, more commonly known as the Monroe Doctrine, asserted the Western Hemisphere as America’s rightful sphere of influence. This paper argues how later federal administrations, under John Tyler and James K. Polk, manipulated the Monroe Doctrine’s terms to justify territorial expansion across North America. By examining four instances of American imperialism during the mid-nineteenth century, including the Texas Annexation, the Oregon Treaty, the Mexican-American War, and Cuban-American relations, this paper addresses how the United States turned a defensive declaration into an aggressive policy fueling socioeconomic and territorial gains. Although American hegemony in the Western Hemisphere remains undoubted, in great part due to the Monroe Doctrine, an insight into its controversial origins demonstrates the ironic nature of present-day American foreign policy. As global geopolitical tensions between the West, China, and Russia increase, the Monroe Doctrine may perhaps reemerge as a focal point in the United States’ grand strategy.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".