MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7013349804

9781552385654.pdf

2003· other· en· W7013349804 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOAPEN (The OAPEN Foundation) · 2003
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLand Rights and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCalgary Institute for the Humanities, University of CalgaryRhodes UniversitySocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaInternational Development Research CentreGovernment of Canada
KeywordsGrassrootsPoliticsLocal governmentDemocracyGovernment (linguistics)ScholarshipWork (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional leadership is a factor that has long been overlooked in evaluations of rural local government in much of contemporary Sub-Saharan Africa. Grassroots Governance?, an interdisciplinary and intercontinental collection, addresses this gap in African scholarship and brings new perspectives on the integration, or reconciliation, of traditional leadership with democratic systems of local government. Articles from the fields of political science, law, postcolonial studies, anthropology, cultural studies, and policy and administrative studies establish a baseline for best practice in Africa and the Afro-Caribbean while taking into account the importance of traditional leadership to the culture of local governance. Case studies are drawn from Ghana, South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho, and Commonwealth countries in West, East, and Southern Africa, as well as Jamaica.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9390.917

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.197 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier 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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOAPEN (The OAPEN Foundation)Same topicLand Rights and ReformsFrench-language works237,207