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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Opposition parties play a crucial role in democracies. While scholars have extensively studied opposition behaviour and institutional powers, little is known about what citizens expect from opposition parties and how they evaluate these expectations being met. This study addresses this gap by examining citizens’ views on three key opposition roles - oversight, cooperation, and offering alternatives - and their perceived fulfilment across four countries: Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Based on a citizen survey, this study assesses how individual characteristics (democratic satisfaction, political interest, education) and institutional context are related to these views. Citizens across all four countries value cooperation. Preferences for the ‘alternative’ role vary between institutional settings. On the individual level, conflict-oriented and dissatisfied citizens value cooperation less, while those with higher education and political interest find oversight and cooperation more important.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it