MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1626158761 · doi:10.3968/4285

The Effect of Intergovernmental Relations (IGR) on Nigerian Federalism: An Examination Intergovernmental Management (IGM) 1999-2007

2014· article· en· W1626158761 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Albert T. Akume

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederalismGovernment (linguistics)PoliticsPublic administrationPolitical scienceFederal stateRelation (database)Mechanism (biology)State (computer science)Diversity (politics)Balance (ability)LawPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Federalism is a political mechanism for promoting unity-in-diversity in a heterogeneous society. The federal system through the IGR uses the IGM mechanism to provide understanding, cordiality balance and collaboration between and among units of government, and between government and the citizenry. In Nigeria’s federal relation, the IGR seems not to have facilitated the right harmonious interactions between and among the various units of government, and among groups. This has resulted in continued conflict and disharmony in some important areas of federal relation with its negative impact on the citizenry and the federal state. Hence this paper utilizing the documentary method examines the utilization of the IGM practice from 1999-2007 in IGR interactions in some areas of government interface in our federal system.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207