Evaluating electoral management body capacity
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
Electoral management bodies (EMBs) perform many functions crucial to promoting electoral integrity, from registering voters to resolving post-election disputes. The capacity of an EMB to perform its tasks, however, is difficult to measure in cross-national perspective. Data on resources and personnel provide only a partial picture of EMB capacity and expert surveys are limited in their comparability. This article presents a new proxy for measuring EMB capacity. It employs a content analysis of EMB websites in 99 countries to measure the presence of indicators of their major functions. It assesses the measurement validity of this new measure of capacity and conducts a small-scale test to determine whether EMBs that score highly do actively communicate with their citizens. An application of this new measure of EMB capacity demonstrates its importance in predicting overall electoral integrity, indicating its importance for future scholarly and policy research.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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