TO THE QUESTION OF FORMS OF VOTING IN MODERN FOREIGN COUNTRIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is devoted to the study of different voting forms in foreign countries. The work identifies the reasons for the voting diversity forms: reducing the electorate to voting attention, the introduction of information technologies. It was found that the most widespread voting form is personal voting at the electoral address place, which can take place with the help of ballots and electoral machines. It was noted that the main disadvantage of this expressing will option is the decrease in the number of voters, and more recently, the inability of the authorities to ensure the citizens safety at polling stations due to the coronavirus pandemic. The paper describes the absentee voting essence (by mail, Internet, etc.). The disadvantage of this expression of will option is the possibility of administrative influence from the authorities. Absentee voting is classified into general and individual voting. Using the polish example, the introduction of mail-order voting in the 2020 presidential elections is shown. It is indicated that voting by post is classified into permissive and notification, internal and external. The voting essence procedure by mail is demonstrated by the example of Austria, USA, Switzerland, Great Britain, Australia. It has been established that in the American doctrine the concepts of «absentee voting» and «voting by mail» are synonymous. The article reveals the essence of voting abroad as one of the options for expression of will, which is used when communication between countries is limited or terminated. This type of voting is considered on the example of Brazil, Portugal, Romania, USA. The work also examines early voting, which is spreading in connection with migration processes and the pandemic, on the example of Finland, Japan, Canada. The essence of a rare form of expression of will — voting by proxy is determined. This type of voting is considered on the example of Monaco, Nauru, Vanuatu. The place of electronic voting in the system of voting forms is outlined. It is noted that its appearance is due to the low political activity of voters. The evoting procedure is analyzed in Estonia, where it still exists, and in the UK and the Netherlands, where this form of expression of will has already been abandoned. The disadvantages of electronic voting have been identified: distrust of voters, risks of interference in the work of the system, and others.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".