MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044210138

BRAZILIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, IT’S FEDERALISM AND INEFFICIENCY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

2020· article· en· W3044210138 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Júlio Freitas Konrad, Marcelo De Sá Mendes, Marina Gondin Ramos, Ronaldo Neves de Moura Filho

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Political Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederalismLegitimacyConstitutionSovereigntyPolitical scienceAutonomyLaw and economicsLawNew FederalismPoliticsDual federalismPower (physics)Element (criminal law)Public administrationSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brazil has a specific kind of bottom-up federalism which public power is located in the autonomy of the free individuals. As DELLAVALLE5 argues: In Hobbes’s vision, power is ascending to the extent that it is no longer seen as an element that the given political authority deduces from divine law or from its own alleged natural superiority. Rather, it arises from the original freedom and independence of individuals, who create the sovereign authority by an act of free will, i.e., by transferring their rights to the newly established public power in order to ensure an adequate protection of the individual entitlements on the basis of the legitimacy emanating from the same fundament of social order. Brazilian federalism was institutionalized by the 1891 Constitution, inspired by United States federalism, however it is far more centralized than it is in Canada or in the United States. It was very important to maintain its national unity. In this sense, ROSENN6 when explaining the adoption of federalism in Brazil argues that.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial and Political IssuesFrench-language works237,207