MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028229748 · doi:10.1177/0956247808096118

International assistance for cities in low- and middle-income countries: do we still need it?

2008· article· en· W2028229748 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Urbanization · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsSurrey Place Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic growthInternational developmentBusinessDeveloping countryDevelopment economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on evidence of a secular decline in urban development assistance on the part of many overseas agencies such as the World Bank and USAID, this article suggests reasons for the decline and considers what can be done to reverse it. Urban assistance (from North to South) is still needed in many countries because it strengthens economic development at all levels of recipient nations and because it engenders networks of decentralized cooperation that promote local development. To be more effective, urban assistance programmes must support local research; they must support South—South networks; they must continue to focus on pro-poor policies; and the agencies that undertake these must act responsibly as the local stakeholders they have in fact become.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.645
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.205 · 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