An Analysis of the Mechanism of Civil Servant’s Illegal Administration: Based on the Methodology of State Space Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The principal-agent relationships exist between the administrative institutions and the civil servants as well as the administrative leaders and the civil servants when the administrative power is exercised. Given the condition that the assigned civil servants are fully equipped with the corresponding professional qualification, this paper analyses the constraints from the clients and agents in those two relationships inside the administration institution, then drawing the conclusion that the illegal administration of civil servants is largely influenced by their leaders’ judgment of the essence of the legislation. We, therefore, should increase the civil servants’ salary, improve the assessment and promotion system, strengthen the legal awareness and ability of administrative leaders and intensify the external administrative supervision and the right restriction. The illegal administration of civil servants refers to the violation of law and damage to the interests of the law-protected social relations when they are in the exercise of their power and in the performance of their duty. This would disrupt normal social order, pose a threat to the authority of the law, damage the public interests and government’s image as well as set a bad example for our people. Prevention on the occurrence of illegal administration is the continuing concern of the academic circle and related departments. The existing research is of great significance to the prevention of the violation of illegal administration since it mainly focuses on the formation, classification of responsibility and the construction of legal liability system of illegal administration. However, these studies seldom explore the mechanism of civil servants’ illegal administration from theoretical analysis, thus the countermeasure is weak. This paper attempts to apply the methodology of state space model into analyzing the mechanism of civil servants’ illegal administration in the exercise of administrative power so as to improve the responsible institution and reduce the occurrence of illegal administration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".