MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086487938 · doi:10.1093/pa/gss075

French Election Theory: Why Sarkozy Lost

2012· article· en· W2086487938 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

VenueParliamentary Affairs · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Theory and Influence
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsSociologyPolitical scienceMedia studiesLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We review theories of French elections, drawing on a recent general theory developed in our analysis of presidential elections (1988–2007). We offer an explanation for why President Sarkozy was not re-elected in 2012. Two key theoretical variables were involved: one long term—ideological identification—and one short term—economic evaluation. The effect of these variables changed greatly from 2007 to 2012, and together largely account for his loss of almost five percentage-points in second-round vote share. In 2007, he ran as an ‘outsider’ who galvanised the base of his traditional right party (the UMP), promising to solve the economic problems the country faced. In contrast, in 2012, he ran as an incumbent with a failed record. Thus, he experienced substantial defection from the Gaullist right, as well as more global dissatisfaction with his poor economic leadership, costing him his presidential re-election bid.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.274 · 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