MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2255495514

The Egyptian Uprising: A Movement in the Making

2011· article· en· W2255495514 on OpenAlexaff
Sundus Balata

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Conflict and Governance
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsPolitical economyPolitical scienceIdeologySocial movementState (computer science)DemocracyResistance (ecology)Regime changeDevelopment economicsIndigenousSociologyLawEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper will reflect on the causes that sparked the 2011 revolution in Egypt. It will use social movement theory to explain the formation of the Egyptian uprising that capitalized on domestic and international events to motivate and mobilize the masses. Tunisia’s ousting of former President Ben Ali provided a political opportunity by igniting hope across the Middle East for similar change. This was combined with contentious domestic politics in Egypt that saw rising inflation, unemployment and an expanding youth demographic. The excessive use of force and state repression served as the starting point of resistance against a system that disenfranchised its masses. By looking at recent political history in Egypt, this paper will show how this movement learned from the weaknesses of previous political experiments with change. The pro-democracy (‘Kefaya’) movement and the Worker’s strikes were two political junctures that sought institutional changes but fell short of their aims. The former was unable to incorporate all political parties and instead opened itself to attack by Mubarak’s regime, while the latter was unable to frame the struggle in demands that appealed to everyone. The social movement in Egypt was successful largely because it ignored all ideological and religious differences in pursuit of regime change; it framed the struggle in ways that appealed to the masses; and it used indigenous processes and cultural framings that promoted and entrenched national unity.

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 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)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicPolitical Conflict and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207