MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969406695 · doi:10.1515/for-2014-0015

The Hope for Audacity: The Understated Unilateralism of President Obama

2014· article· en· W1969406695 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

VenueThe Forum · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresidential systemScholarshipUnilateralismContext (archaeology)Political sciencePoliticsExecutive orderPublic administrationLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article offers an overall assessment of President Barack Obama’s use of unilateral presidential directives and situates his usage in a broader historical context. It draws on academic scholarship and history to better understand the extent to which Obama’s use of unilateral presidential directives (such as executive orders, proclamations, and memoranda) comports with or departs from that of other presidents. It examines five perspectives on Obama’s use of unilateral presidential directives (namely, a quantitative overview of his executive orders and proclamations, a qualitative review of some of his more noteworthy directives, and a survey of what the president, his conservative critics, and liberals have had to say about his directives). The evidence indicates that Obama has been fairly reserved or reticent in his use of unilateral directives. Four possible explanations for the nature of his (dis)use of unilateral directives (namely, reservations of a political, constitutional, or psychological nature, as well as the use of alternatives to unilateral presidential directives are considered).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.277 · 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