MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210643738 · doi:10.12660/cgpc.v27n87.85110

Impact of COVID-19 on the comparative practice of federalism: Some preliminary observations

2022· article· en· W4210643738 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rupak Chattopadhyay, Felix Knüpling, Diana Chebenova

Bibliographic record

VenueCadernos Gestão Pública e Cidadania · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLocal Government Finance and Decentralization
Canadian institutionsCanadian Federation of University Women
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)FederalismCorporate governancePolitical sciencePublic healthSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Development economicsGeographyEconomic growthPoliticsBusinessEconomicsLawMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented international event. The spread of the coronavirus – the biggest public health crisis in a century and the first of this scale in the globalized modern world – has prompted unparalleled responses by national governments. The proliferation of 24-hours news coverage and social media has allowed people across the world to follow, in real time, the unfolding and visible impacts of the pandemic. In 2020, as governments grappled with fluctuating waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, the effectiveness of public policy varied among federal nations (the paper focuses on countries that are explicitly and constitutionally federal, and countries with governance systems in which governance powers and responsibilities are devolved from the central level to the subnational level). Federal countries such as Australia and Canada managed to keep mortality low, whereas others such as Brazil, Spain and the United States suffered some of the highest numbers of fatalities anywhere around world, both in absolute and relative terms (Kontis et al. 2020, 1919-1928; Brunner et al. 2020; Ritchie et al. 2020)

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCadernos Gestão Pública e CidadaniaSame topicLocal Government Finance and DecentralizationFrench-language works237,207