MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145631578 · doi:10.1017/s0007123405000220

When Far Apart Becomes Too Far Apart: Evidence for a Threshold Effect in Coalition Formation

2005· article· en· W2145631578 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

VenueBritish Journal of Political Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElectoral Systems and Political Participation
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompromiseImperfectGovernment (linguistics)StructuringEconomicsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the hypothesis is examined that coalition government formation in West European parliaments is systematically constrained by the existence of limits or bounds on the extent to which parliamentary parties can compromise on their policy positions. Two methods are developed by which these bounds or ‘policy horizons’, as they are termed here, can be estimated, and it is demonstrated via the analysis of hypothetical data that the methods, although imperfect, are unlikely to manufacture artefactual threshold effects. These methods are then applied to data on fourteen post-war West European parliamentary systems to show that, even when other relevant factors are controlled, the structuring effect of policy horizons can be detected in the formation of coalition governments. The article concludes with some comments on the theoretical implications of the existence of policy horizons.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.666
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.401
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