Bibliographic record
Abstract
After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the democratization of the former Soviet states in Central Eastern Europe, Poland’s strong economy and internal stability primed it to be a leader in the region and make it a post-communist success story – but this optimism would not last. The election of the Law and Justice Party (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość in Polish, PiS for short) in 2015 marked a significant downturn in the quality of the country’s democracy. In this paper, I examine Poland’s democratic backsliding at the hands of PiS through three of their most prominent anti-democratic actions: the decreasing freedom of the press, the erosion of judiciary independence, and the party’s increasing Euroscepticism, relying on data from international organizations such as Freedom House’s Nations in Transit and Reporters Without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index to measure just how much the quality of democracy has changed in Poland. Finally, I provide a brief explanation of how Poland’s citizens have begun to resist the Law and Justice Party, proving that there is still a chance for democracy to thrive.
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".