MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414827917 · doi:10.29173/psur397

Confounding Failure: American Imperialism and the Implications of the Iraq War

2025· article· en· W4414827917 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Finnegan Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitical Science Undergraduate Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary and Defense Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIraq warContext (archaeology)Middle EastPower (physics)Spanish Civil WarNational securityWar on terrorWorld War II

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The American invasion of Iraq is internationally condemned. Most critiques evoke images of a horrific war fought for oil and other staunchly American national interests. There exist several valid reasons to claim that the Iraq War made the United States out to be an oil-hungry power bent on imperial aggrandizement, but the actual context behind the Iraq War is far more complex. For example, although the oil industry was a factor in the US’ decision, the invasion of Iraq was not conducted solely to secure Iraqi oil. While there absolutely were grounds to intervene in Iraq, especially Saddam Hussein’s flagrant human rights violations, the methods by which America entered the war deeply affected the regions of the Middle East and North Africa as well as the United States itself. This paper will attempt to address how the American government’s failure in Iraq under George W. Bush not only brought the United States a worsened international perception, but also brought about several far-reaching consequences that affect the United States’ security as a superpower.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.016
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.345 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitical Science Undergraduate ReviewSame topicMilitary and Defense StudiesFrench-language works237,207