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
In general, studies on ethnicity, conflict, and territorial cleavages in federations and federal systems, as well as the analyses of constitutional designs to manage conflict, lack a comprehensive and systematic comparative account of (a) the different types and aspects of diversity in federal systems and their determinants and (b) the consequences of the approaches taken to manage them.26 As has been mentioned, in recent times there has been a renewed interest in researching the relationship between federalism and diversity. Such attention has been reflected in a growing number of publications from different angles and normative perspectives. Some of them have compared two or a few more countries. However, this book, in a systematic and comprehensive manner using a common template of issues, compares diversity and unity regarding twelve federal systems around the world: Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Ethiopia, Germany, India, Nigeria, Russia, \nSpain, Switzerland, and the United States of America.
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 | 0.012 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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