MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040660157 · doi:10.1521/siso.2012.76.4.433

Democratic Revolution <i>in Permanenz</i>

2012· article· he· W2040660157 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

VenueScience & Society · 2012
Typearticle
Languagehe
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Theory and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVictoryDemocracyDemocratic revolutionSocial Democratic PartyGermanExpression (computer science)Russian revolutionEconomic historySociologyLawPolitical scienceHistoryPoliticsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to Richard Day and Daniel Gaido, the editors of Witnesses to Permanent Revolution: The Documentary Record (2009), the basic insights of Trotsky's theory of “permanent revolution” were shared by other prominent German and Russian Social Democrats, including Karl Kautsky, Franz Mehring, Parvus, Rosa Luxemburg and David Ryazanov. In reality, the documents found in Witnesses show that these writers did not use the expression “permanent revolution” in the same way as Trotsky, namely, to link together the democratic and socialist revolutions. Rather, such expressions were used to link together episodes within the process of democratic revolution. These writers exhorted the Russian workers never to get discouraged or rest on their laurels, but rather to keep on fighting for the democratic revolution in Permanenz until final victory was reached. An essential reason for their lack of interest in Trotsky's scenario was a clash over the role of the non-socialist peasantry.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.292
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.311 · 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