MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411618217 · doi:10.51847/gsvs5efhty

10.51847/gSvs5EFHTY

2000· article· en· W4411618217 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Islamic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharacter (mathematics)PresidencyPerspective (graphical)Political scienceSociologyComputer scienceLawArtificial intelligenceMathematicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The broad objective of this study is to examine the problems of imbalance in our national life between/ among states and ethnic/religious groups in relation to the recent appointments made by the Buhari Presidency on diversity in Nigeria.This is because those from the Southern part of Nigeria have continued to express concern over the appointments made so far by President Muhammadu Buhari.They posit that the appointments were lopsided and not in the best interest of the country.President Buhari is from Katsina State, Senate President Bukola Saraki and House of Representatives Speaker, Yakubu Dogara are from Kwara and Bauchi states respectively.The judiciary is led by Justice Mahmud Mohammed from Taraba State.Of the seventeen appointments made by Buhari so far, seventeen are from the North, while five are from the South.The appointments, however, drew the ire of Nigerians who asked Buhari to respect the country's principle of federal character.Already, the Internet, particularly the social media and blogs, are agog with reactions and counter-reactions on the matter.For those who are opposed to his appointments so far, they smack of tribalism, nepotism, religious bigotry and a pointer to his illmotivated aspiration to Islamize the country, which must be resisted.The good governance thesis posits that while calling on Southerners to be patient and watch events unfold, they should be hopeful because no region could be a subordinate of the other.This view argued that the appointments made so far are tested and trusted in various capacities and their competencies are not in doubt.Due to the nature of this research, descriptive research method was used in order to address the challenges and problems posed by the study.Sources of data were mainly from secondary sources gathered from pamphlets, journals and published books related to the field of study.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.783
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9960.980

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.248 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations6
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime to knitSame topicEducation and Islamic StudiesFrench-language works237,207