MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989098732 · doi:10.4018/jegr.2006100104

E-Government and Multi-Level Governance

2006· article· en· W1989098732 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mila Gascó‐Hernández, Jeffrey Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Electronic Government Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Immigration
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederalistGovernment (linguistics)Public administrationDemocracyContext (archaeology)Corporate governanceState (computer science)Administration (probate law)Political scienceBusinessPoliticsLawGeographyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

E-government is entering its second decade as a widely-embraced agenda for public sector reform. There are often distinctions made between e-government as administrative reform and e-governance as democratic reform, although there is invariable overlap between both spheres. In this context, the purpose of this paper is to undertake an examination of the impacts of e-government on both administration and democracy in a multi-level governance environment. In doing so, we will provide a comparative assessment of two sub-national jurisdictions known for investing aggressively in e-government in recent years: Catalonia, Spain, and Ontario, Canada. This investigation will thus seek to identify the manner by which the pursuit of e-government by a state and a province is intertwined with – or separate from federalist structures.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.332 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Electronic Government ResearchSame topicHuman Rights and ImmigrationFrench-language works237,207