MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099016201 · doi:10.1007/3-7908-1746-5_12

How to Achieve the Goal of Broadband for All

2007· book-chapter· en· W2099016201 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueContributions to economics · 2007
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBroadbandBroadband networksTelecommunicationsBusinessGovernment (linguistics)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, the paper aims to explain national experiences in penetration of broadband, through an analysis of drivers and barriers. Second, the paper will on this background assess the role of government intervention in order to achieve universal access to broadband services. The paper focuses on identification and analysis of drivers and barriers towards the development of broadband for all. The purpose is to provide input for an assessment of various policy measures aiming at stimulation of the growth in penetration of broadband services. The analysis builds on experiences with broadband development in four countries, which varies from market leaders (Canada, Denmark and South Korea) to average penetration regarding broadband services (Germany). The paper is based on ongoing work in WP3 of the BREAD project (Broadband in Europe for all: a multi disciplinary approach), which collects information on ongoing regional and national initiatives in Europe and around the world.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.283 · 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