MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599004211

Re-Examination of Federal Theories: Prospect and Challenges

2016· article· en· W2599004211 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rajkumar Singh, Pawan Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher education of social science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPost-Soviet Geopolitical Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederalismPolitySovereigntyDual federalismPluralism (philosophy)Political economyDemocracyPolitical scienceCooperative federalismConstitutionGlobalizationLaw and economicsPoliticsLawSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Literally and historically federalism is the result of an agreement. It is when two or more sovereign States resolve to surrender a part of their sovereignty and join hands to constitute a new nation, a federal polity is born. It is a union without the constituting units losing their own identities (Kashyap, 2012). Irrespective of any variant of federal polity, federalism is relevant only in a situation where the pluralism is territorially based, where particular groups are concentrated in separate territorial units or where the societal diversities are territorially identifiable, definable and separable. It is an arrangement between separate territorial entities to come together or to avoid break-up and stay united by sharing power through free democratic will. In fact, in large nations with multiplicity of diversities, federalism is the only way to democracy. It is also generally understood that the actual functioning of the federal system in any country does not depend on the nature of the constitution or the general legal framework but on the various factors that influence the political processes in the country. The paper aims to analyze and highlight the recent challenges faced by various federal systems all over the world. The changing circumstances like economic crisis, global war, globalization and international terrorism and launching of functional federalism provide a strong input on the subject for a re-examination of various approaches to make it more effective, purposeful and development-oriented.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0070.048
Scholarly communication0.0110.026
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0070.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher education of social scienceSame topicPost-Soviet Geopolitical DynamicsFrench-language works237,207