Bibliographic record
Abstract
When the idea of democracy went through its revival in the early modern period, it was eventually attached to the ideal of the state – a legal order that restrained popular enthusiasm and that could exist on any scale. The common assumption was that any viable political order had to be on a relatively large scale if it was to persist in the face of external challenges and deal effectively with modern problems. The implication was that it had to transcend the city. Beveridge and Koch challenge these modern assumptions, suggesting that urbanization re-establishes the connection between democracy and urban life. Although they focus on the stakes and conditions of a form of life that transcends both city and state, they still insist that we should see democracy ‘like a city’. Does seeing democracy like a city help us understand how such issues might be resolved democratically? I hope so, but my hopes are often sorely tested.
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 | 0.016 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.045 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.023 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.065 | 0.095 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".