MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054534070 · doi:10.1177/0016549203065002001

Here Comes the Dot Force!

2003· article· en· W2054534070 on OpenAlex
Leslie Regan Shade

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

VenueGazette (Leiden Netherlands) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction planICTSPolitical scienceBridge (graph theory)Developing countryDigital divideAction (physics)Plan (archaeology)BusinessPublic relationsEconomic growthInformation and Communications TechnologyManagementEconomicsGeographyLawPhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the DOT Force, a G8 initiative that aims to bridge the digital divide in developing countries. The DOT Force, announced in Summer 2000, has culminated in a set of recommendations released at the G8 meeting in Genoa in 2001. After a brief overview of the DOT Force objectives and the `Genoa Plan of Action', this article looks at the role of ICTs in development, the role of the World Trade Organization in fostering telecommunications reform in developing countries and concludes with suggestions for a more open process for consultation of the role of ICTs in development.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · 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