MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768686073 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v10n5p132

18 Years of Decentralization Experiment in Indonesia: Institutional and Democratic Evaluation

2017· article· en· W2768686073 on OpenAlex
Rudy Rudy, Yusnani Hasyimzum, Heryandi Heryandi, Siti Khoiriah

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Fiscal Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecentralizationDemocratizationAuthoritarianismContext (archaeology)DemocracyCorporate governancePolitical scienceDemocratic governanceEconomic systemAppeasementInstitutional changeLocal governancePolitical economyDevelopment economicsPublic administrationEconomicsLocal governmentGeographyLawManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Big Bang decentralization in Indonesia had been begun since 1999 as the appeasement of many problems facing Indonesia after the fall of authoritarian rezim in 1998. This path had been suggested as all solution on local development by international donors such as World Bank and supported by many experts. Within the context, this paper evaluates the experiment of decentralization in Indonesia within the perspective of good governance and democracy. Using institutional design analysis coupled with empirical observation, this paper examines the problem within the legal institutional instrument and democratization in the local level.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.231 · 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