MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Subnational Authoritarianism in Comparative Politics

2024· book-chapter· en· W4401776923 on OpenAlexaff
E. Leigh Gibson

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Contemporary Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuthoritarianismPoliticsPolitical scienceComparative politicsPolitical economySociologyLawDemocracy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Regime dynamics are multitiered territorial affairs, and our fixations on national politics have until recently blinded us to their territorial complexities. After a national government is democratized, subnational authoritarian or “hybrid” regimes often continue to deny rights guaranteed by national laws and constitutions. In these situations of “regime juxtaposition,” subnational authoritarianism is maintained by cross-tier institutional arrangements and strategic coordination between local autocrats and leaders of national democratic regimes. Subnational democratization struggles are also multilevel affairs, with local oppositions and autocrats employing distinctive local and national strategies to promote or prevent national involvement in the local conflict. These “boundary control” struggles are the basic conflict pattern in situations of subnational authoritarianism in national democratic regimes. New research agendas are advancing our understanding of the causes and consequences of subnational regime variations and on the subnational dimensions of national democratic “backsliding.”

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.023
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.151 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicHistorical and Contemporary Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207