MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023347283 · doi:10.1177/1755088215573092

Theorizing state civil disobedience in international politics

2015· article· en· W2023347283 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of International Political Theory · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Peace and Security Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCivil disobedienceArgument (complex analysis)State (computer science)Power (physics)LawPoliticsLaw and economicsPolitical scienceCivil societyOrder (exchange)Political philosophySociologyEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Illegal state actions are sometimes interpreted as civil disobedience. Yet, liberal theorists insist that, to count as such, states must intend to reform the systemic imperfections of the international legal order. Moreover, states must have the capacity to engineer such reforms responsibly. These requirements result in an elitist conception of international civil disobedience because weaker states cannot refashion the key rules of the international legal order. By introducing a broader conception of resistance than found in existing theory, I show how weaker states can still engage in civil disobedience. A conceptual framework of two types of power supports my argument: constituent power and destituent power. If state action were expressed through these two types of power, then more states and more types of illegal action would count as examples of civil disobedience.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.323 · 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