Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of civil disobedience was introduced by David Henry Thoreau in 1849 by what he experienced in the fight against slavery system in USA. The aims of this paper is to discuss the concept of civil disobedience and analyse its practice in Malaysia. This paper base on content analysis and interview. The analysis shows that first, there have several features to justify the acts of civil disobedience that happened in society. Second, in Malaysia, the concept of civil disobedience is something new. This is because in general, opposition is the term used to indicate resistance. The opposition only involves the struggle for political purposes, while the concept of civil disobedience include broader aspects involving the opposition parties, non-governmental organizations, civil society and activists to create public awareness for the fight against injustice in government. However, in practice, civil disobedience has been present in Malaysia since before independence. Therefore, this article takes a broader approach in analysing civil disobedience in Malaysia, with discussion focusing on historical aspects and current practice.
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 | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.094 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".