MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identity Gaps: How and Why a Nation Eludes A State

2020· article· en· W3016924982 on OpenAlexfundno aff
К.О. Телин, Кирилл Филимонов

Bibliographic record

VenueSotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMozilla FoundationJohns Hopkins UniversityLondon School of Economics and Political ScienceMcGill UniversityPrinceton UniversityYale University
KeywordsPoliticsLegitimacyIdentity (music)SkepticismSociologyState (computer science)Public sphereLaw and economicsStatuteNational identityOrder (exchange)Political scienceFace (sociological concept)EpistemologyLawPolitical economySocial scienceEconomicsAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of “national identity” is one of the most popular constructs linking political theory and policy agents’ requests intended to maintain socio-political order in general, and to legitimize policy in particular. This aspect of legitimacy as explored through the national identity issue engages our attention in this review. The authors explore this aspect as applied to the problem of classical political order, focusing on state capacities and policymaking, accompanied rhetorically by a national identity discourse and based on common values, beliefs, and models of behavior. The review starts from a skepticism towards state capabilities and its claim to monopolize reproduction of a socio-political order which appeals to a volatile idea of a “nation.” This is an obvious case for political philosophy and the social sciences, and also a strong example to illustrate the complexities that states face in the “colonizing” of a public sphere. The complexities are particularly expressed in a growing uncertainty of all statutes of identity-politics agents. The article emphasizes that precisely because of the “colonization” strategy, a “nation” eludes a state that loses its reference points such as “order” or “stability.” The authors conclude that a policy of such a style described above will always be emasculated and fail to provide any kind of social integration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.127
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological ReviewSame topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207