Judicial Review and Bureaucratic Impact
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
How effective are the courts in controlling bureaucracies? What impact does judicial review have on the agencies which are targeted by its rulings? For the first time, this book brings together the insights of two intellectual disciplines which have hitherto explored these questions separately: political science and law/socio-legal studies. Leading international scholars from both fields present new research which focuses on the relationship between judicial review and bureaucratic behaviour. Individual contributors discuss fundamental conceptual and methodological issues, in addition to presenting a number of empirical case studies from various parts of the world: the United States, Canada, Australia, Israel, and the United Kingdom. This volume constitutes a landmark text offering an international, interdisciplinary and empirical perspective on judicial review's impact on bureaucracies. It will significantly advance the research agenda concerning judicial review and its relationship to social change.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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