MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

After the Democratic Charter's First Decade: Achievements, Limitations, and Next Steps

2012· article· en· W2132550647 on OpenAlex
Maxwell A. Cameron

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

VenueLatin American Policy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitics and Society in Latin America
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterDemocracyCompendiumPolitical scienceDemocracy promotionPromotion (chess)Public administrationDemocratizationLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reviews a number of options to improve the implementation of the Inter‐American Democratic Charter, including a compendium of best practices, a peer review mechanism, a special democracy rapporteur, and a democracy traffic light. These mechanisms could provide elements for a graduated response to democratic developments ranging from positive reforms to serious backsliding. The proliferation of possible solutions should not discourage efforts to reinforce the Democratic Charter, undermine the coherence of democracy defense and promotion activities, or distract attention from the need for clear concepts to guide evidence‐based policy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.285 · 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