Konsultacje społeczne i referendum w systemie politycznym PRL (ujęcie porównawcze)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bibliografia Bortoli G., Sociologie du referendum dans la France moderne, Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence, Paris 1965. Bouissou M., La pratique referendaire en France, „Revue International de Droit Compare” 1976, nr 2. Capitant R., Democratie et participation politique dans les institutions francaises de 1875 a nos jours, Bordas, Paris-Bruxelles-Montreal 1972. Denquin J.M., Referendum et plebiscite, Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence, Paris 1976. Niewiadomski Z., Instytucje demokracji bezpośredniej w Szwajcarii, „Problemy Rad Narodowych" 1987, nr 68. Saladin P., Le referendum populaire en Suisse, „Revue Internationale de Doit Compare” 1976, nr 2. Saladin P., Le referendum populaire en Suisse, „Revue International de Droit Compare” 1976, nr 2. Szentpeteri I., A kozoetlen demokratikus formak sorsa a burzsoaallami fejlodesben [Formy demokracji bezpośredniej w rozwoju państw kapitalistycznych], „Acta Universitatis Szegediensis. Acta iuridica et politica” 1962, t. IX, nr 1. Szentpeteri I., A kozvetlen demokracia fejlodesi iranyai [Kierunki rozwoju demokracji bezpośredniej], Akad. Kiadó, Budapest 1965. Ustawa z dnia 6 maja 1987 r. o konsultacjach społecznych i referendum, Dz.U. 1987 Nr 14, poz. 83. Zawadzka B., Model przedstawicielstwa socjalistycznego, Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk, Wrocław 1980.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".