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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent scholarship on Africa, South Asia, and Latin America has sought to theorize twenty-first-century governance by highlighting the importance of ‘informal sovereignties’, unofficial or privatized domains of authority that operate within and alongside domains under formal state control. Analyses of Southeast Asian cases have been notably absent from this work, despite a long regional tradition analysing the centrality of figures of informal authority. This article revisits Southeast Asian analyses in light of scholarship on ‘informal sovereignties’, identifying three qualities that set these analyses apart from comparable work on other regions of the world: their focus on patterns of perennialism in the cultural idioms of informal sovereignties; their view that informal sovereignties can only be understood through their historical relations to the modern state and the market; and their emphasis on the fragility of sovereign power and the importance of spectacle and performance in shoring it up. The article argues that, taken together, these elements provide a culturally and historically contextualized approach for analysing contemporary informal sovereignties, including those religious militias that have garnered much attention in recent years.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it