MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045098566 · doi:10.1093/publius/pjt030

The Question of Federalism in Nepal

2013· article· en· W2045098566 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

VenuePublius The Journal of Federalism · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederalismUnitary statePoliticsConstitutionPolitical scienceNepaliDual federalismNew FederalismCooperative federalismEthnic groupLaw and economicsPolitical economyPublic administrationLawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2012, a Nepali Constituent Assembly tasked with drafting a federal constitution was dissolved after four years of wrangling over federalism issues. This article develops three explanations for why federal structures have yet to take shape in Nepal. It argues that consensus on federalism hides a reluctance by key actors to build a federal system; that while some political forces want federal structures based on ethnic identities, two of the three main political parties have little appetite for "identity-based federalism"; and that political actors hold antagonistic ideas about federalism and what it should achieve. More broadly, the article speaks to cases of "holding together" federalism stemming from previously unitary states.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.285 · 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