MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068201644 · doi:10.1080/23276665.2014.975907

Hybrid governance in India: a research review and agenda

2014· review· en· W2068201644 on OpenAlexaff
S. Thomson, Deepak Sharma, Eric Kong

Bibliographic record

VenueAsia Pacific Journal of Public Administration · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Administration Research
Canadian institutionsMacEwan UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governancePovertyIndependence (probability theory)Government (linguistics)Distribution (mathematics)Democratic governancePolitical scienceDemocracyState (computer science)Natural resourceDevelopment economicsEconomic growthEconomicsPoliticsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

India is the world’s largest democracy and one of the fastest growing economies in the world, yet is it fraught with social inequalities, high levels of poverty, and an ineffective distribution of financial and natural resources. Governments in India at the federal, state and municipal levels have been struggling with these issues since independence. Recently, in terms of the governance arrangements involved, they have moved towards forms of hybrid governance. A review of selected forms indicates mixed findings on the benefits they offer to the public. More detailed research needs to be undertaken at all levels of government to gain deeper insights into how forms of hybrid governance can assist in solving some of India’s societal ills.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.212
GPT teacher head0.489
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

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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsia Pacific Journal of Public AdministrationSame topicPublic Policy and Administration ResearchFrench-language works237,207