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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
National pluralism is a feature that is not shared by all federations. Nor, until recent times, has it received sufficient analytical attention. In certain federations various national groups coexist. Among the national characteristics of these groups, we can mention the fact that their members recognise themselves as such because they share some cultural patterns. They also share some sense of historical distinctiveness in relation to other groups of the federation, are situated in a more or less clear territory, and display a will to maintain its distinctiveness in the political sphere. This, for example, is the case in Belgium, Canada, India, or Spain. These are plurinational federations or regional decentralised polities with institutional and regulatory challenges distinct from those faced by mononational federations such as the USA, Germany, Austria, Brazil, or Australia. This article briefly outlines certain elements pertaining to liberal‐democratic federalism within plurinational contexts. It gives particular attention to the characteristics of the main types of federal agreement, and a proposal for a federal organisation, here called plural federalism, that is more adequate to the needs of plurinational societies.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 it