MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1549561867 · doi:10.25071/1496-6778.7971

"Better Dead than Communist!" Contentious Politics, Identity Formation, and the University Square Phenomenon in Romania

2007· article· en· W1549561867 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julia Brotea, Daniel Béland

Bibliographic record

Venuespacesofidentity net · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEastern European Communism and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenonPoliticsCommunismSquare (algebra)Identity (music)Post communistPolitical scienceIdentity politicsGender studiesSociologyLawArtAestheticsPhilosophyEpistemologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 1990 protest episode known as the University Square Phenomenon constituted a crucial and contentious episode for Romania's political transition from communism.Analysis of this incident sheds light on the long-term consequences political protests can have when they translate into routine politics.More specifically, such an analysis enriches the emerging literature on "how social movements matter" by underlining the lasting impact of the University Square Phenomenon on Romania's party system and political culture.Drawing in part on the theoretical framework presented in Doug McAdam, Sidney Tarrow, and Charles Tilly's Dynamics of Contention, the analysis of the University Square focuses on two major processes: identity formation and contentious repertoires.This examination shows that the political identity gained during the University Square Phenomenon and the repertoire for political protest it generated played a decisive role in its aftermath and the naissance of a democratic civil society in Romania.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.017
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuespacesofidentity netSame topicEastern European Communism and ReformsFrench-language works237,207