MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077298433 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v2n4p144

Good Governance in Bangladesh: A Quest for a Non-Political Party Approach

2009· article· en· W2077298433 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sayed Javed Ahmad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCorruption and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstitutionPoliticsScope (computer science)Corporate governanceGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceStrengths and weaknessesGood governancePolitical systemYield (engineering)Constitution of IndiaPolitical economyPublic administrationLaw and economicsEconomicsLawDemocracyComputer scienceManagementEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses the problems and issues on the political failures in Bangladesh and seeks to suggest some possible solutions. The approach here is analytical mostly reviewing current news, reports and other related materials. A comparative study is also carried out between the present and proposed system to get a quick glimpse on the overall situation. The idea here is to identify reasonable and practical solutions that would yield better result for Bangladesh and bring about positive changes in the political scenario that would allow the country to move forward as a successful and dignified nation. The author has kept the scope of this paper limited to political party, elections, governance and constitutional reforms.A great deal of references is used in the thesis from the Constitution of Bangladesh as it is the highest source of guidance for our government. While doing so, some weaknesses of the constitution have been detected and some corrections are suggested where deemed appropriate. Examples of some gross violation of the constitution by the political party based government have also been discussed.

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 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 categoriesnone
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 score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicCorruption and Economic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207