On the Scope Limit and the Time Limit of the Temporary Administrative License Granted by Local Government Rules
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Administrative License Law of the People’s Republic of China authorizes local provincial government rules to grant a temporary administrative license with the purpose of satisfying necessary needs of administrative management when governing laws, administrative laws and regulations and local regulations haven’t been formulated. Since the institution has been put into force, a lot of problems have arisen. For example, the scope of the granting of a temporary administrative license is indeterminate and the phenomenon of overdue implementation prevails. This article has adopted the Scope Theory in light of the scope of the granting of a temporary administrative license and defined the boundary of Scope from the perspective of safeguarding civil rights and interests to the full. When a temporary administrative license has expired, it’s still in force as long as related local regulations are under discussion to guarantee the continuity of administrative management, but a deadline shall be set to avoid overdue implementation. A temporary administrative license, which is due, shall become invalid automatically after expiring as long as related local regulations haven’t been submitted to relevant department for approval. When it has been submitted to the Local People’s Congress and its Standing Committee for discussion of further exercise and related local regulations haven’t been formulated, it shall become invalid automatically after the legal time limit, which is equal to the time announced in the discussion result or the deadline set, expires. When the stop time hasn’t been announced before the due date of the legal time limit, related administrative agencies are liable for the administrative counterpart’s loss incurred during the period of overdue implementation.
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 | 0.008 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".