Filibuster: Obstruction and Lawmaking in the US Senate
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
Filibuster: Obstruction and Lawmaking in the US Senate , Gregory J. Wawro and Eric Schickler, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006, pp. xx, 326. The US Senate presents observers with a paradox. It is a strong and influential legislative chamber, whose strength and influence derive in great part from unique rules and norms that not only allow but genuinely celebrate obstructionism, and techniques that encourage the frustration of the democratic majority by unrestricted parliamentary gamesmanship. The filibuster—a tactic whose purpose is to prevent the accomplishment of legislative business—is a fundamental, defining characteristic of both Senate procedure and the Senate's institutional self-image. How does the Senate—with its jealously guarded traditions of unlimited debate, universal recognition, and disregard for germaneness—ever manage to get anything done?
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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