MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414510016 · doi:10.1057/s41304-025-00521-z

Political parties and youth’s political (under) representation

2025· article· en· W4414510016 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

VenueEuropean Political Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersKonrad-Adenauer-Stiftung
KeywordsRepresentation (politics)NominationPoliticsComparative politicsScholarshipPower (physics)American political science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This introductory/ overview article discusses and applies the so-called ladder of recruitment to youth and their representation in parliament. The ladder includes four steps (i.e., eligible citizens, party members, candidates and legislators) with diminishing returns for youth representation at each step. I further illustrate that the literature on youth representation has mainly focused on the final stage of the ladder, the election stage, and has largely neglected the role of political parties in the recruitment and nomination of youth. This symposium rectifies this dearth of scholarship by looking at the role of youth party members, their relative power within parties and the opportunities they have to gain nomination.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.310 · 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