The Application of Administrative Innovation and the Principle of Law Reservation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Administration innovation means the breakthrough and reform of the existing system, while the law reservation, with its specific functions, imposes restrictions on the administrative innovation and keeps it within the framework of the rule of law. However, due to its own limitations, law reservation will restrict the innovation in administration which could not play the role of positive administration. Law reservation’s function of right protection should be given full play and the scope of the current law reservation should also be expanded so as to bring administrative innovation on the track of rule of law. At the same time, give full play to the law’s function of stimulation and as for the beneficial administrative act, relax properly the restrictions of law reservation. In order to meet the practical needs of a service administration era, law reservation has to make moderate adjustments when necessary to realize the lawless administrative innovation and make sure administrative innovation could achieve the unity of formal rule of law and substantive rule of law through the principle of proportionality and public participation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.077 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".