French National Elections: Democratic Disequilibrium and the 2007 Forecasts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract.The outcome of the 2007 elections in France raises a number of questions about the current state of democracy in that country. To put these elections into perspective, we examine the evolution of the French party system and electorate throughout the Fifth Republic. We look first at the pattern of party electoral movement over time. Then we evaluate the partisan cycle with respect to certain equilibrium conditions, namely stability, competition, and democratic rule. Based on these patterns, we arrive at a classification of French national elections using the Michigan school's theoretical framework. A key conclusion is that, in general, these Fifth Republic elections are in disequilibrium and often fail to express the majority partisan will. The 2007 results, which represent a return of the traditional right, are examined against the Iowa forecasting model, to see if they depart from these troubling conclusions. Résumé.Les résultats des élections de 2007 en France soulèvent une série de questions à propos de l'état de la démocratie dans ce pays. Afin de mettre ces élections en perspective, nous examinons l'évolution du système partisan et des inclinaisons idéologiques de l'électorat français sous la Cinquième République. Nous nous attardons d'abord au mouvement dans le temps des appuis partisans. Nous évaluons ensuite l'équilibre du cycle partisan en France sur la base de certaines conditions, à savoir la stabilité, la compétition et la gouverne démocratique. Cet exercice permet d'en arriver à une classification des élections nationales françaises inspirée du cadre théorique de l'école de Michigan. La conclusion principale de cette analyse est qu'en général, ces élections attestent d'un déséquilibre, car le plus souvent, elles n'expriment pas la volonté majoritaire de l'électorat. Les élections de 2007, marquées par un retour en force de la droite, sont enfin analysées à la lumière du modèle de prévision électorale dit «de l'Iowa» afin de vérifier si elles s'inscrivent ou non dans cette dynamique de déséquilibre.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".