MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2260900826 · doi:10.1177/0975087815580726

Bringing in the Future in Kenya: Beyond the 2010 Constitution

2015· article· en· W2260900826 on OpenAlexaff
Kempe Ronald Hope

Bibliographic record

VenueInsight on Africa · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsInternational Development Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstitutionPoliticsLegislatureDevolution (biology)Corporate governanceLanguage changeGood governancePolitical sciencePublic administrationEconomic growthDevelopment economicsPolitical economyLawSociologyEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kenya’s future is inexorably tied to the implementation of the 2010 constitution. Some of the reformed and newly created institutions as mandated by this constitution offer the best opportunity to the country in the quest for building a capable state with good governance and sustained economic progress. This work argues that the fate of the country will be determined by how well and consistently the 2010 constitution is implemented through the functioning of a small group of key institutions covering electoral activities, the justice sector, devolution, legislative oversight and corruption control. In fact, sustained socio-economic progress and political development in Kenya hinges critically on the country’s approach to implementation of the 2010 constitution that has been so enthusiastically endorsed by Kenyans. The successful implementation of the 2010 constitution will also enhance the chances of achieving the aspirations outlined in the Kenya Vision 2030 of substantial improvements in the economic, social and political fronts.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsight on AfricaSame topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207