Forum: Youth as Boundary Actors in International Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Youth represent a great part of humanity and have always been active and intriguing political actors, yet youth remain sidelined in international studies. Issues of social identity perception and its consequences have been embraced by post-positivist approaches in international studies. Yet, while race, gender, and class challenges are shaking the discipline, age is a key research gap. To fill this gap, the conceptual departure of this forum is to study youth, taking 16–30/35 as an age range, as “boundary actors” in international politics. We assembled contributions that address this conceptual departure on topics, including health, conflict, climate change, and indigenous people’s rights, across all world regions with specific focuses on Africa and Asia. Overall, the forum demonstrates that youth are able to move the boundaries: (i) of norms in international politics by asking for a more inclusive implementation of human rights and/or environmental justice; (ii) of procedures by suggesting to broaden decision-making; (iii) of international activism by combining social media and protests as new strategies. Taken together, the contributions show that youth have and are a world-building project, not just a world-confirming project.
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 | 0.017 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.001 |
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".