EPR volume 13 issue 4 Cover and Front matter
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
most important debates in the discipline and demonstrating the highest possible standards in conceptualisation, theorisation and methodology. Submissions should emphasise why they are of interest to a broad readership across sub-disciplines and should engage with central theoretical debates in political science. EPSR welcomes empirical papers based on either qualitative or quantitative methodologies. These papers should be placed in the context of larger (theoretical) debates in the discipline. EPSR also welcomes conceptual and theoretical papers as well as contributions from the field of normative political theory. EPSR is not concerned solely with European political issues nor is it conceived as exclusively for European scholars. Submissions dealing with global issues and non-European topics are very much welcome. We wish the journal's readership to be as wide and diverse as possible, including both scholars and practitioners. Therefore articles should be written in an accessible manner with a minimum of jargon and insider language.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.011 | 0.011 |
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 it