Review of “The Arab Spring Abroad: Diaspora Activism against Authoritarian Regimes”
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
In a time of ongoing challenges to democracy and the growing global reach of autocrats around the world, The Arab Spring Abroad: Diaspora Activism against Authoritarian Regimes by Dana M. Moss offers optimism in the global fight against authoritarianism. The book provides a theoretically new and empirically rich perspective on transnational mobilization during the Arab Spring and investigates the varying conditions under which diaspora members gain voice, come together, and mobilize against dictatorial regimes in their homelands. Bringing diaspora studies and social movement literature into conversation, the book constitutes a key comparative effort to theorize, conceptualize, and empirically assess dynamic processes that shaped Libyan, Syrian, and Yemeni diaspora mobilization against authoritarian regimes before and after the Arab Spring. Moss does so by drawing on extensive multi-sited fieldwork, interviews, and ethnographic methods and displays the value in rigorous inductive analysis that illuminates the power of diaspora activists that are otherwise overlooked...
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it