Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le elezioni presidenziali francesi del maggio 2017, con la secca sconfitta del Fronte Nazionale di Marine Le Pen, sembravano aver esorcizzato lo spettro del populismo in Europa. Appena un anno dopo, questo incubo si è ripresentato con la vittoria elettorale in Italia della Lega e del Movimento cinque stelle. È la conferma che il neopopulismo non è un fenomeno transitorio, ma una condizione strutturale delle odierne democrazie occidentali. Esso contrassegna il passaggio dalla rappresentanza politica alla rappresentazione della politica, in un’epoca in cui incertezza e insicurezza, rabbia e paura, la materia prima dei partiti antisistema, sembrano destinate a monopolizzare l’orizzonte emotivo e politico del nuovo Millennio.
Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.
How this classification was reachedexpand
The three-model screen
all 5,600 screened works →All three models called this out of scope.
Essay on populism and Italian elections; a political-science topic.
It analyzes populism and Italian politics rather than the research system.
Political commentary on Italian populism and democracy, not research systems.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.095 | 0.038 |
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".