Amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation: Dictated Necessity and Consequences in the Conditions of the Modern World
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The subject of this article is Law of the Russian Federation on Amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation (14.03.2020 No. 1-Federal Constitutional Law) «On improving the regulation of certain issues of the public power organization and functioning», namely, aspects of «coordination of health care» and «protection of the family, motherhood and childhood». The authors analyzed the issues of the medical care provision centralization, the impact of these amendments on the legal capacity of citizens. For a more in-depth analysis, the experience of foreign countries (Canada and Germany) was used. Despite the fact that the health care systems of the countries cited as an example differ in their essence and organization, nevertheless, they influence the formation of the availability of medicine for the population. As a result of the study of this experience, it was concluded that the delegation of freedom in the provision of medical care to lower levels of government allows to provide to the population affordable and high-quality medical care. It is noted that at present it is necessary to review the degree of participation of local governments in ensuring the availability of medical care in accordance with the federal law.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it