MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114066799 · doi:10.1111/nana.12684

Artificial intelligence and the future of nationalism

2020· article· en· W3114066799 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNations and Nationalism · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEthics and Social Impacts of AI
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNationalismSovereigntyPopulationHumanityState (computer science)Competition (biology)Political economySociologyPolitical scienceEconomic systemPositive economicsLawEconomicsComputer sciencePoliticsBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) is spreading through all walks of life, promising social and economic disruptions that prompt comparisons with the Industrial Revolution. While there is growing interest in AI ethics and its implications for humanity, there has been surprisingly little consideration of its implications for national identities and nationalism. This paper argues that the transformation of citizens into population data is driving changes to state sovereignty and that the simultaneous competition between (and within) states and global corporations on a structural level and expansion of algorithmic population management on a quotidian level may crystallize in ways that are likely to produce nationalist responses. It concludes by proposing a number of causal mechanisms and hypotheses regarding the emergence and spread of “AI nationalism.” Scholars in nationalism studies can benefit substantially from embracing the study and applications of AI, though they ignore its development and spread at their peril.

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.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.299 · 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