Re-democratization in Chile: Is the “New” Democracy Better than the “Old”?
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
Much of the literature on democratic transitions has focused on the transition from authoritarianism to democracy, but few studies have examined how democracies that re-emerged compare to those that existed in the past. Examining the Chilean case, this study explores the degree to which the “new” democracy has recovered its former strength, posing a similar question for other Latin American countries. It considers the conceptualization of quality of democracy that underpins this controversy and explores the methodological challenges of intertemporal comparison, which may be relevant for other cases that have experienced periods of authoritarian rule and process of re-democratization. We find that, overall, democracy in the contemporary period is more robust. Yet, to an important extent, indices’ different understandings of the concept of the quality of democracy are relevant in terms of the degree to which they emphasize procedural aspects versus democratic outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it