MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162814208 · doi:10.24908/fg.v10i1.4571

Book review: Multi-Level Party Politics in Western Europe

2013· article· en· W2162814208 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dominic Heinz

Bibliographic record

VenueFederal Governance · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsPolitical scienceGermanFraming (construction)RestructuringPolitical economyAutonomyState (computer science)Public administrationWestern europeResizingEuropean unionSociologyLawBusinessInternational tradeGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-Level Party Politics in Western Europe is a study of territorial dynamics within party systems and party organizations in Western European multi-layered systems. It argues that processes of state restructuring and party crisis have forced parties to adapt their competitive strategies and internal structures. With the logic of territorial party competition becoming more complex, parties in Europe have developed quite different responses to deal with the challenges of multi-level politics. This book challenges the 'national bias' of party research which has traditionally focused on the statewide level by assuming broadly uniform patterns. Speaking to students of party politics and territorial studies, it contributes to a new territorial approach which acknowledges the importance of multi-layered institutional framing for party politics. Its also includes a thorough comparative analysis of vertical linkages and sub-state autonomy in Austrian, Belgian, British, German and Spanish parties.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.006

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFederal GovernanceSame topicPolitical Systems and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207