MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404377710 · doi:10.1163/09763457-bja10078

Extending Voting Rights to Emigrants

2024· article· en· W4404377710 on OpenAlex
Nathan W. Allen, Elizabeth Iams Wellman

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

VenueDiaspora Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJudicial and Constitutional Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVotingEmigrationPolitical scienceComputer securityComputer scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Since 1980, most states have granted voting rights to citizens living abroad. Although cross-national research focuses on when and where emigrant enfranchisement occurs, there has been little systematic attention to the variation in how enfranchisement occurs (for example, by constitutional amendment) and who extends these rights (international actors, for example). We argue that the variation in legal modalities and political actors is important for understanding why enfranchisement occurs and helps to account for the subsequent institutional inclusion—and exclusion—of emigrant voters. Using an original dataset which documents every extension of non-citizen voting rights (n = 153), we uncover variations in legal processes, regionally and over time. Although legislation is the most common enfranchisement pathway, judiciaries have become increasingly involved since 2000, particularly in Asian and African countries. Furthermore, emigrant enfranchisements involving constitutional reforms or plebiscites tend to be the most durable, whereas enfranchisements by international agreement are most prone to policy reversals.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.315 · 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