Bibliographic record
Abstract
Few would dispute the suggestion that contemporary radical right parties have exerted a considerable impact on European political systems. Over the past quarter-century parties such as the Front National in France (FN), Alleanza Nazionale (AN) in Italy and Vlaams Belang (formerly Vlaams Blok [VB]) in Belgium have scored impressive electoral gains, subsequently entering public office at the local, regional and national levels. Moreover, the recent performance of parties such as the Austrian Freedom party (FPÖ) and Aliance for the Future of Austria (BZÖ) underscores the continued electoral relevance and appeal of parties on the radical right. As others observe, 'too many gains have occurred in too many countries to accept the idea that the radical right is simply a passing fad or fashion' (Norris, 2005, p. 8). Clearly, not all parties have enjoyed as much success as others. While some radical right actors have transformed their fledgling organisations into contenders for national government, others have languished on the political fringe and appeared either unable or unwilling to abandon their extremist 'baggage'. Yet in broad terms, the electoral advance of radical right parties has been one of the most striking developments to have occurred in the post-war political arena.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".