MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389526437 · doi:10.1080/13510347.2023.2277293

The network origin of Thailand’s youth movement

2023· article· en· W4389526437 on OpenAlexaff
Akanit Horatanakun

Bibliographic record

VenueDemocratization · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSoutheast Asian Sociopolitical Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersAmerican Political Science Association
KeywordsAutocracyPoliticsSocial movementGratitudeSociologyPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)Gender studiesMedia studiesLawPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thailand appeared to be under a tide of youthful revolutionary change. In 2020, in a rare moment in Thai history, university and secondary school students, particularly female and LGBTQ + schoolchildren, took the lead in national protests against an autocratic government. It was a period during which the seemingly impossible, such as the reform of Thailand’s royal institutions, appeared possible. What were the historical origins of the country’s revolutionary youth movement? This article argues that the Thai youth movement emerged from youth activist networks fostered by post-coup political entrepreneurs. It describes the foundational moments of these networks and analyses their inside brokerage processes, i.e. how these political entrepreneurs cultivated friendships and ties among segregated young activists by creating unique spaces – campsites and activist houses. These underground spaces allowed activists to connect, learn, brainstorm, organize mobilization, and build cross-issue and cross-regional activist ties under an autocratic regime.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDemocratizationSame topicSoutheast Asian Sociopolitical StudiesFrench-language works237,207