PRACTICAL AND FUNCTIONAL RESEARCH OF THE INTERACTION OF LEVELS OF PUBLIC AUTHORITY IN FEDERAL STATES IN THE CONTEXT OF THE NEW CORONAVIRUS INFECTION (COVID-19) PANDEMIC: ASSESSMENTS AND PROSPECTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this research are to explore foreign experience of interaction of various levels of public authority in federal states in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, to determine the prospects for the development and improvement of the activities of the public authority system in Russia in this part. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The regulatory legal acts and the practice of interaction of various levels of public authority during the COVID-19 pandemic in federations (Australia, India, Canada, USA) were research. RESULTS: It has been established that a dual federal system with strict rules for the distribution of powers and responsibilities between the federation and its regions impedes a coordinated national response in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, while various forms of executive federalism serve as the key to successfully countering this threat. The latter can be based on historically strong centralist tendencies, the existing negotiating practices of interaction between the executive branch at all levels, the experience of implementing federal programs and the work of emergency intergovernmental mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: It has been substantiated that the optimal organization of managerial decision-making in the context of countering a pandemic presupposes a complex interagency approach with a strong federal presence.
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 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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".