Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The regime transition literature has found that apart from exogenous shocks, internal splits and leadership succession are the two most likely causes of single-party breakdown. Unlike hegemonic party systems in Mexico and Taiwan that experienced party alternation, Singapore has been governed by one party uninterruptedly for more than five decades. Under the People’s Action Party’s (PAP) rule, export-oriented Singapore has weathered a series of global financial crises. Even when the country posted a negative growth rate in 2001, the PAP government was able to garner an exceptional 75 percent vote share in the general election (GE) the same year. Now, apart from tackling rising inflation and income inequality, what appears to concern most people is the imminent death of the country’s strongman, Lee Kuan Yew. Will the PAP continue to rule and maintain order after the passing of its founding leader? This chapter focuses on the PAP’s leadership succession to highlight the key intraparty processes and mechanisms that have kept one of the world’s longest-serving political parties together. It argues that the PAP’s long-term survival will depend more on institutions than coercion, charisma, or ideological commitment. Indeed, the PAP’s incumbency advantage, coupled with an institutionalized leadership succession system, has facilitated self-renewal and kept the party together. Specifically, the elitist leadership selection model, based nominally on meritocracy, is well institutionalized and serves as an incentive distribution system that builds party loyalty and elite cohesion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".