Comparative analysis of dual citizenship legislation in Ukraine and other countries: Opportunities for adapting Ukrainian practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to determine the state of Ukrainian legislation on dual citizenship, compare it with the provisions of legal acts of Canada and Germany, and identify possible ways to adapt Ukrainian practice to European norms. For an effective study of the topic, it was important to apply hermeneutical, comparative and historical methods. The publication highlighted the essence of dual (multiple) citizenship and argues for the need for its recognition by state governments. It analysed the urgent problem in Ukraine of the spread of bipatriotism and the relevance of amending the provisions prohibiting dual citizenship. The article examined the legislation of Ukraine, Germany and Canada on dual citizenship. Based on the results of the study, it for- mulated a legal definition of the concept of dual citizenship and outlines the positive and negative aspects of its acquisition. The legal norms regulating bipatriotism are compared. This helped to identify the main ways of legal regulation of this issue and to formulate recommendations for relevant reforms of the legislation on citizenship in Ukraine (recognition of dual citizenship by the State, creation of a unified State register of bipa- triots and their cross-border movement, development of requirements for acquiring citizenship and provisions on certain restrictions for bipatriots (regarding their participation in the activities of public authorities), etc.). Importance of ensuring effective legal regulation of dual citizenship in Ukraine as a key element of integration into the global world is substantiated
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it