Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analyses political parties and party politics in the contemporary Arab world The Middle East is a region notorious for political systems traditionally built around absolutist monarchs and military-dependent presidents. What is the role of political parties in such a context? How do they support or undermine such authoritarian forms of rule? What part have they played in the survival and transformation of political systems after the Arab uprisings? What are the policy preferences of party elites and how do they connect with citizens’ expectations? How do parties challenge and reflect the main social cleavages? Finally, what is the genuine significance of parties and party politics in a region struggling for some sort of democratic future? This book attempts to answer these questions through a thorough theoretical and empirical examination and analysis of the most important aspects and traits of political parties and party politics in the Arab world, exploring cases from across the region. Key Features Sets out an innovative research agenda on a under-studied topic Provides a comparative perspective on political parties across the region Analyses the ways in which political parties in the Arab world matter and develop Offers a more systematic understanding of the functioning of Arab regimes by incorporating the role political parties play in them Includes case studies of Iraq, Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Kuwait, Lebanon and Palestine Contributors Larissa Alles, University of St. Andrews Aurelie Daher, Université Paris-Dauphine Loes Debuysere, Ghent University Sophie A Edwards, Independent Researcher Anass El Kyak, Université Laval Manal A. Jamal, James Madison University Amir Magdy Kamel, King’s College London Hendrik Kraetzschmar, University of Leeds Raquel Ojeda-García, University of Granada Zoltan Pall, National University of Singapore Valeria Resta, University of Milan Anne Wolf, University of Cambridge and University of Oxford Mohammad Yaghi, Queen’s University in Kingston
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".