"Ni buenos, ni malos" : juego sucio y resultados en los procesos de elección de dirigencia nacional en el Partido de la Revolución Democrática (1999-2008)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Se investiga por qué los actores que compiten por la dirigencia nacional del Partido de la Revolución Democrática, incumplen las reglas del juego y aceptan el resultado. Se abarcan cuatro procesos de elección (1999, 2002, 2005 y 2008), los cuales fueron agrupados en pares comparables. Se concluye que la estructura de situación, conformada por la similitud de fuerzas y el bajo costo por incumplir reglas, provoca elecciones con alto grado de juego sucio. En tanto que, la aceptación del resultado se explica por lo atractivo del incentivo interno (reparto de poder). El recorrido de la investigación se encuentra marcado en sus diversas fases por los siguientes problemas/debates del partido: institucionalización, liderazgo carismático, tribus, radicales y moderados.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 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".