MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2555681286

Government Reactions to Rural Famines in Three Consecutive Ethiopian Regimes, 1880s–1991: A Comparative Study

2016· article· en· W2555681286 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dechassa Abebe

Bibliographic record

VenueEthiopian journal of development research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamineQuarter (Canadian coin)Government (linguistics)Development economicsSettlement (finance)HistoryEconomicsArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Famines and starvations of rural peasantries were persistent for centuries in Ethiopian history. This article focuses on government reactions to such famines that occurred from the last decades of the 19th to the last quarter of the 20th centuries in Ethiopia. About three great famines and starvations took place in the country during those decades. The main objective of this study was to assess the nature of government reactions to rural famines during the three consecutive regimes (the last decades of the 19th to the last quarter of the 20th centuries) in comparison to one another. A number of archival sources, the direct products of the time, and other primary sources were consulted and analysed. Results showed that the reactions of the respective  governments during those famines had been far from satisfactory; and were even deteriorating from the said had been better in the late 19th century to the worst in the 1970s and 1980s. Keywords : Rural famine, government reaction, resource allocation, relief and  rehabilitation, re-settlement and migration

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthiopian journal of development researchSame topicAfrican history and culture analysisFrench-language works237,207