The Impact of a Practice-Oriented Paradigm on Public Administration and National Security
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the article is to reveal the impact of the practice-oriented paradigm on public administration for effective national security and to identify ways to improve the management system with due regard for current challenges and threats.The methodology of the article includes an analysis of scientific literature, documentary sources, and applied research in the field of public administration and national security.The study found that the practice-oriented paradigm allows for the effective implementation of strategies and policies, promotes coordination and cooperation between different agencies and organizations, and ensures an effective response to crisis situations.The results of the study confirm that the practiceoriented paradigm of public administration has a direct impact on national security through the following key aspects: effectiveness of crisis response (approaches aimed at solving specific problems and solving problems allow for a better response to crises and ensure the sustainability of national security); involvement of experts (taking into account the opinions and experience of specialists and practitioners allows for the development of more adaptive and effective security strategies); flexibility and adaptation.The conclusions of the article point to the need for continuous improvement of the management system and strategy development, taking into account current challenges and threats.The significance of this article lies in the fact that it offers practical recommendations for political and managerial personnel that will help improve the public administration system and ensure national security.The findings of the study can be used to develop strategies, policies, and programs in the field of public administration and national security.
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 | 0.050 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".