MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321454774 · doi:10.4337/9781800885325.00030

Nigeria: a model of federalist ethnic conflict management or federalist illusion?

2023· book-chapter· en· W4321454774 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rotimi T. Suberu

Bibliographic record

VenueEdward Elgar Publishing eBooks · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian GovernmentQueen's UniversityMcGill University
KeywordsFederalistFederalismEthnic groupPolitical scienceEthnic conflictDecentralizationPublic administrationPolitical economyDevelopment economicsLawSociologyPoliticsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nigeria represents a prime example of the use and redesign of federalism to manage deep-seated, often overlapping, ethnic, regional, and religious diversity in the developing world. Despite persistent inter-group violence, the military's dissolution of Nigeria's original large ethnic regions into smaller constituent states functioned to avert a recurrence of catastrophic national civil war. Vigorous scholarly and practitioner debates persist, however, about the foundations, genuineness, viability, reform, and future of Nigeria's federalism. The complex facets and dynamics of this chronically contentious federation can be explained to students using five subtopics: the federation's origins under British colonial auspices as a dis-aggregative holding together federalism; the role of military rule; the effects on managing violent inter-group conflicts of changes in the design, number, and relative size of federal subunits; ongoing debates on alternative reform paths and futures for the federation; and the Nigerian federal system in comparative perspective.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEdward Elgar Publishing eBooksSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207