MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377037164 · doi:10.16997/jdd.1182

Discourse, Deliberation and Difference in an Authoritarian Public Sphere

2023· article· en· W4377037164 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Deliberative Democracy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChina's Socioeconomic Reforms and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuthoritarianismDeliberationEliteContext (archaeology)DemocracyPublic spherePolitical scienceDeliberative democracySociologyEpistemologyPoliticsLawPhilosophyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores how discourse, deliberation and difference – classically advanced by Jurgen Habermas and Iris Marion Young within a Western democratic context – functions in an authoritarian environment, with special reference to China. The article suggests why authoritarian discourse and deliberation is more limited than its Western democratic counterparts. It further suggests that the incorporation of difference into authoritarian discourse and deliberation is difficult due to the inherent tensions between the ‘Other’ and the ruling elite in authoritarian polities. Nevertheless, these constraints do not invalidate the notion that discourse and deliberation is theoretically possible and has a practical function in authoritarian regimes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it