MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344040284

Сравнительный анализ финансирования политических партий и их избирательных фондов зарубежных стран с «полной демократией»

2014· article· ru· W2344040284 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueКонтуры глобальных трансформаций: политика, экономика, право · 2014
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Political Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsState (computer science)Political scienceBusinessFinanceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author analyzed characteristics and sources of the financing of political parties in the foreign countries (Austria, Spain, Canada, Luxemburg, New Zealand, Norway). It was noted that political parties of the abovementioned countries get direct financial support from the state either permanently or during election campaigning. In many cases they follow the limits of the expenditure fixed for the electoral campaigns. The author disclosed the forms of the indirect financial support from the state and restricted sources of the financing of electoral funds.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0080.007
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0070.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.044

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 head0.298
Teacher spread0.271 · 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