Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Introduction (Ronald Tinnevelt and Helder De Schutter, Radboud University Nijmegen and Katholieke Universiteit Leuven). 2. Cosmopolitanism and human rights: Radicalism in a global age (Robert Fine, University of Warwick). 3. The Resurgent Idea of World Government (Campbell Craig, University of Southampton). 4. Structuring Global Democracy: Political Communities, Universal Human Rights, and Transnational Representation (Carol Gould, Temple University). 5. Federative Global Democracy (Eric Cavallero, Southern Connecticut State University). 6. Interaction-Dependent Justice and the Problem of International Exclusion (Raffaele Marchetti, LUISS University and University of Naples L'Orientale). 7. Cosmopolitan Democracy and the Rule of Law (William E. Scheuerman, Indiana University). 8. A-Legality: Postnationalism and the Question of Legal Boundaries (Hans Lindahl, University of Tilburg). 9. The conflicting loyalties of statism and globalism: Can global democracy resolve the liberal conundrum? (Deen Chatterjee, University of Utah). 10. Universal Human Rights as a Shared Identity. Impossible? Necessary? (Andreas Follesdal, University of Oslo). 11. Motivating the Global Demos (Daniel Weinstock, University of Montreal). 12. Is liberal Nationalism incompatible with global democracy? (Helder De Schutter and Ronald Tinnevelt, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven and Radboud University Nijmegen). 13. Immigration, nationalism, and human rights (John Exdell, Kansas State University). Index.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.008 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".