MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098107005

Digital Bridges: Developing Countries in the Knowledge Economy

2003· article· en· W2098107005 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Steve McCarty

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Technology & Society · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousThe InternetBridge (graph theory)Traditional knowledgeDiasporaKnowledge economyPublic relationsEconomic growthDigital divideTheme (computing)IntermediationPolitical scienceSociologyMedia studiesBusinessComputer scienceWorld Wide WebLawEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From a village in rural Ghana, Dr. John Afele has studied in Belgium, Japan and Canada. He has traveled further on development missions and for conferences, for instance as a Board member of Global Knowledge for Development. Serving as a North-South bridge person in worldwide knowledge networks through the Internet also qualifies him for the book’s theme. His focus is on innovative ways to bridge the global digital divide and to empower local economies with global knowledge. He pursues every possible way that the least fortunate could be assisted more effectively by development grants, intellectualizing indigenous knowledge, mobilizing Africans of the Diaspora and others concerned with development. The reader can see issues through indigenous eyes where actual conditions, needs and possible solutions can be more clearly assessed than through the intermediation of international development agencies. A social dimension of the book is evident in having extensive Acknowledgements near the beginning of the book, plus an emphasis on networks and partnerships as well as ideas and technologies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducational Technology & SocietySame topicICT Impact and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207