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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to examine the presidential threshold in relation to the simultaneous general elections 2019. After the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 14/PUU-XI/ 2013 which mandates the general election simultaneously raises the pros and cons of setting the presidential threshold. In the constitutional perspective, using or not using the presidential threshold is not contrary to the constitution, because the presidential threshold is an open legal policy of the legislator. The legislators need to rethink the provisions of the presidential threshold especially in relation to the simultaneous elections, taking into account the advantages and disadvantages of applying or abolishing the presidential threshold, in order for the purpose of strengthening the presidential system to be achieved. The existence of simultaneous general elections has substantially eliminated the provisions of the presidential threshold, so the threshold requirement to nominate the President and Vice President becomes irrelevant. However, if the legislators demand presidential threshold, the middle path that can be selected is to apply the presidential threshold by using the legislative election 2014 with a record of institutionalizing the coalition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it