Two-and-a-Half-Party Systems and the Comparative Role of the `Half'
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, the concept of the `two-and-a-half-party system' is re-examined, with particular focus on the role of the `half'. The analysis is on longer-term parliamentary democracies since 1945 or democratization. First, various ways of measuring a party system are outlined, and a new alternative is proposed. Based on this, 10 countries are seen to qualify (at least for certain time periods) as two-and-a-half-party systems: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom. Each of these systems is outlined and analysed. This category is then contrasted with both two-party systems and multiparty systems in order to explain its causes. Next, some general conclusions about when `half' parties are likely to matter more (in a governmental sense) are made, with a particular distinction occurring between `hinge' and `wing' half parties. Finally, the geographic shift in the presence of two-and-a-half-party systems is noted.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it