MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999850696 · doi:10.1111/1468-2451.00303

Adaptability and change in federations

2001· article· en· W1999850696 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

VenueInternational Social Science Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederalismDelegationVariety (cybernetics)Public administrationPoliticsPolitical scienceFiscal federalismInterpretation (philosophy)Corporate governanceAdministration (probate law)Political economyDecentralizationEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Like all other governing institutions, federal structures must be able to adapt and adjust to changing economic, political, and social circumstances. This article outlines the major drivers that call for change in the institutions and processes of federalism. These include changing citizen orientations and expectations, changing policy agendas arising from the environment, new patterns of governance and public administration, and the pressures of globalisation. Although some worry that federal institutions are rigid and inflexible, the paper describes a wide variety of mechanisms and processes through which federal institutions have been able to respond. These include constitutional amendment, judicial interpretation, coordination through intergovernmental relations and associated intergovernmental agreements, fiscal federalism, asymmetrical arrangements, the delegation of powers, and, in limited cases, the use of emergency powers.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.687
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.326 · 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