Popular Views of the Legitimacy of the State in Mali
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ResuméCet article se fonde sur un sondage d’opinion de l’Afrobaromètre au Mali pour jeter des lumières sur les espoirs de maintenir la démocratie, les marchés et les états dans les pays pauvres. Bien que les Maliens préfèrent la démocratie aux autres régimes politiques, ils manifestent des taux de participation politique bas relativement aux autres Africains. En outre, s’ils se montrent patients en ce qui concerne les réformes d’ajustement économique structurel, de nombreux Maliens doutent de la capacité des marchés à remplacer l’état pour ce qui est de générer des emplois. La nature multiculturelle des sociétés africaines comme le Mali, n’ébranle cependant pas la légitimité accordée à l’état par les citoyens. En fait, la légitimité repose sur la satisfaction des citoyens, inspirée par la performance personnelle des chefs d’état particuliers. Cet héritage patron-clientèle mène les Maliens à projeter les défauts des chefs d’état sur les évaluations des régimes dans leur ensemble.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".