MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403763284 · doi:10.1080/01402390.2024.2411195

Explaining the 2003 Iraq war (again) - Gore-war vs. Gore-peace revisited

2024· article· en· W4403763284 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 Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Relations and Foreign Policy
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceEconomic historyIraq warPolitical economyLawSociologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I offer a response to Professor Joseph Stieb’s article entitled ’Rethinking Gore-War: Counterfactuals and the 2003 Iraq War’. In his critique of my book, Explaining the Iraq War: Counterfactual Theory, Logic and Evidence, Stieb claims that neoconservatives and right-wing hawks in the Bush administration were singularly responsible for mobilizing domestic and international support for the US–UK invasion based on fabricated threats about Iraq’s WMD and links to 9/11, Al-Qaeda and globalized terrorism. The central objective of my book (and this reply) is to refute and repudiate Stieb’s fundamentally flawed and simplistic ’neoconist’ account of the 2003 invasion.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.287 · 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