MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799894949 · doi:10.1057/s41304-018-0172-9

Introduction: Academic freedom in danger: case studies of Turkey, Hungary and Japan

2018· article· en· W2799894949 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Stockemer, Mikyoung Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Political Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAcademic Freedom and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComparative politicsPolitical philosophyPolitical scienceInternational relationsInternational political economyEuropean integrationAcademic freedomMulti-level governancePolitical economyRegional scienceEconomic historyPoliticsInternational tradeGeographySociologyLawEconomicsEuropean union

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1992, Francis Fukuyama famously predicts the "end of history." His famous thesis states that the installation of capitalist liberal democracy at the end of the Cold War in many parts of the world is the end point of human history. He argues that a democracy provides for harmonious interactions between citizens and the state and satisfies the needs of citizens; therefore, no capitalist democracies should ever see any need to revert back to any type of autocracy. Today, 25 years later, things are less rosy. Capitalist democracies are not the "only game in town" (Sin and Wells 2005). On the contrary, a Freedom House Report (2018) illustrates that roughly 39% of the world population live in a free state; this is only two percentage points more than the world population that lives in autocracies. 1 In addition, 2017 is the 12th consecutive year of a decline of global freedoms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Political ScienceSame topicAcademic Freedom and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207