MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312465362 · doi:10.54313/journalmp.v2i.60

Keperluan Mewujudkan Semula Akta Perkhidmatan Parlimen di Malaysia

2022· article· en· W4312465362 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ikmal Hisham Tah, Muthanna Saari, Faridah Jalil, Idzuafi Hadi Kamilan, Akmal Hisham Abd Rahim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Malaysian Parliament · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndonesian Election Politics and Participation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParliamentLegislationPublic administrationInstitutionGovernment (linguistics)Context (archaeology)Political scienceLower houseLawService (business)LegislaturePoliticsEconomicsEconomyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parliament represents an ever-important institution in the nation-building of a country. Parliament is committed to its oversight function towards the executive action of the government and represents the voice of the people through its elected representatives to the Dewan Rakyat (House ofRepresentatives) of Malaysia. The Dewan Negara (House of Senate) plays its check and balance role in the decisions taken in the Dewan Rakyat. Therefore, Parliament as an institution needs a parliamentary service system that is independent and efficient to provide impartial support to members of the House. Since the Parliamentary Service Act 1963 was abolished in 1993, there has been no specific legislation on parliamentary services in place in Malaysia. This has resulted in parliamentary staff being bound under the Federal Public Service. However, in the current context of modern parliament, there is a pressing need for legislation on parliamentary service to be introduced to ensure the empowerment and independence of parliamentary institutions in uplifting the quality of parliamentary representation in Malaysia. The practice in several countries, such as the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, is compared to evaluate the need to reintroduce the parliamentary service act. This article finally sets out to recommend the reintroduction of the act to ensure parliament’s check and balance function can be discharged accordingly.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.270 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Malaysian ParliamentSame topicIndonesian Election Politics and ParticipationFrench-language works237,207