MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401957773 · doi:10.1080/07036337.2024.2391185

Is the EU’s rule of law crisis a byproduct of dissensus and disunion?

2024· article· en· W4401957773 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 European Integration · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and International Law Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsRule of lawPolitical scienceLawLaw and economicsEconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Is the EU’s rule of law crisis [ROLC] indicative of a deepening ‘disunion’ sparked by the rise of illiberal ideas? I sound a skeptical note, suggesting that disunion arguments exaggerate dissensus, overstate the role of ideology, and do not capture key events and political interactions shaping the crisis. Specifically, disunion arguments cannot explain the emergence of a pro-ROL consensus in the European Parliament, neglect member states repeatedly articulating and committing themselves to fundamental liberal values, understate the ideological opportunism and about-faces of self-styled ‘illiberals,’ and overstate dubious evidence of public support for illiberal ideas and backlash to EU enforcement. The evidence is more consistent with new intergovernmentalist claims that member governments across the ideological spectrum are willing to sacrifice the ROL to safeguard consensus in the European Council, and that the Commission retreats from its role as ‘guardian of the Treaties’ absent intergovernmental support.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.298 · 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