Bibliographic record
Abstract
Democratization not only needs to be based on changes in a more democratic political structure, but it is also important to be supported by changes in the behavior of elites involved in political contestation. This article discusses the process of political democratization in Indonesia after the authoritarian New Order regime. The democratization process begins with changes in political structure, which are manifested in the form of various pro-democratic laws and regulations. This includes the implementation of direct regional head election, which are political contestations at the local level. The result was a significant change in political dynamics in the form of involving voters in the process of regional head election. At first everyone tends to recognize the success of political reforms that have changed the face of local democracy in Indonesia. However, after one election period took place, the ideals of democratization in Indonesia seemed to be ignored by political actors. Even politicians tend to display banal political behavior, and do not care about political decay traps, solely in order to win a political contestation. Elite, as the main stakeholder actor, has failed to show that they are able to practice democratic principles that uphold moral integrity.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".