MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283818353 · doi:10.1163/17087384-bja10068

The ECOWAS Court and Civil Society Activists in Nigeria: An Anatomy and Analysis of a Robust Symbiosis

2022· article· en· W4283818353 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Obiora Chinedu Okafor, Udoka Ndidiamaka Owie, Jake Okechukwu Effoduh, Rahina Zarma

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Journal of Legal Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Contemporary Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustenanceCivil societyLegislatureGovernment (linguistics)LawIndonesianPolitical scienceEconomic JusticeSociologyPublic administrationPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article focuses on, and attempts to explain, two key aspects of the relationship between the Community Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States or ECOWAS Court and Nigerian civil society activists or CSA s. It analyses the available evidence on the ways in which these CSA s have contributed – to the generation of this regional court’s impact on the executive, judicial and legislative branches of government in Nigeria as well as analyses the available evidence regarding the impact that the court – through a combination of its design, orientation and decisions – has in turn had on the conception and dramatisation of civil society activism in Nigeria. The article develops an analytical explanation for the emergence and sustenance of the robust symbiosis that is thus revealed between the Court and this specific but important national community of civil society activists.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.033
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Journal of Legal StudiesSame topicHistorical and Contemporary Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207