MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970900854 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v12n5p30

On the Essence of Authorities Provided by Russian Federation to Interstate Association

2019· article· en· W2970900854 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alsu Machmutovna Khurmatullina, Aleksandr Fedorovich Malyi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Policy Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKazan Federal University
KeywordsConstitutionalityRussian federationPolitical scienceSovereigntyState (computer science)Association (psychology)LawEconomic unionLaw and economicsPublic administrationConstitutionSociologyRegional sciencePoliticsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The trend of interstate association development, which is actively spreading in the modern world, entails many questions that require explanation at the theoretical level. Increasingly, the issue of the state right constitutionality to participate in such associations began to be raised with the transfer of part of its authority to the associations. With the implementation of this right, the problem of preserving the sovereignty of the union state appears. These issues are considered in the article on the example of participation of the Russian Federation in the Eurasian Economic Union. In this regard, the article describes the conditions under which it is possible to transfer some part of state powers to the supranational level. Various doctrinal approaches to the study of the concept of “authority”, “the authority of the Russian Federation” are also given. The use of such research methods as comparative legal, system-structural, formal-legal allowed the author to conclude that the transfer of part of the powers of the Russian Federation to the EAEU is constitutional and the legal nature of the interstate association itself.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicLegal and Policy IssuesFrench-language works237,207