Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the birth of Publius: The Journal of Federalism in 1971, seven book review editors have enlivened the pages of the journal by presiding over the assessment of more than 420 volumes. E. Lester Levine laid a solid foundation as the founding book review editor, serving from 1971 through 1974. Subsequently Kenneth T. Palmer set the record for endurance, editing the section for over a decade from 1987 into 1997. Most recently, Publius has benefited greatly from the service of my immediate predecessor, Joseph Marbach, who took on the task in 1997. In assaying the reviews that have appeared over three decades, the first principle of any new book review editor becomes crystal clear: preserve the strong legacy that has been forged. At the same time, however, the transition to a new journal editor, Carol Weissert, affords an opportunity to take stock and explore possible new variations on past themes in terms of both substance and format. From the journal's inception, Publius reviews have covered myriad subjects. Table 1 presents a rough categorization of the degree to which book reviews focused on various topics in the period from 1971 through mid-2004. A quick glance at the table points to a dominant and not very surprising pattern—the overwhelming majority of the volumes zero in on the United States. To be sure, this dominance did not completely crowd out other foci. Generic works on the normative and empirical issues embedded in theories of federalism comprise 8 percent of the tomes reviewed. Perspectives rooted in political philosophy, historical analysis, and comparative federalism tend to dominate this category. Another 15 percent of the reviewed books were global in that they targeted federalism outside of the United States. Volumes that focused on nations with very prominent federal systems, such as Canada, received considerable attention, as did those analyzing the emergence of new institutional structures that might increasingly take on the characteristics of federalism, such as the European Union. But although Publius reviews have explicated the generic core of federalism and have had global reach, the fact remains that approximately three-quarters of them target the American experience.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".