MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312353397 · doi:10.1177/0010414004269824

Democratization and the Left

2004· article· en· W2312353397 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

VenueComparative Political Studies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Industrial and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocratizationLeft-wing politicsDemocracyPoliticsNew LeftTransformative learningPolitical economyDivergence (linguistics)IdeologyPolitical scienceLeft and rightLeft behindSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines how democratic transition has shaped leftist politics in Taiwan, South Korea, Brazil, and Chile. On one hand, the new left has positioned itself differently in the two regions, specifically in terms of when the left emerged (or reemerged) onto the political scene and how it has organized politically. On the other hand, new left forces in both regions have moderated their political tactics and ideological demands. This article contends that the new left has had to adapt to new political contexts. Divergence in new left politics can be explained by variations in the pacing of democratic reform, the institutional basis of democratic breakthrough, and salient cleavage structures. Yet the imperatives of democratic competition—irrespective of the specific mode of transition—have compelled the new left in both regions to similarly moderate their political tactics and transformative demands.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.230 · 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