MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<scp>A</scp>fghanistan's <scp>A</scp>ynak copper deposit tender process: case study

2012· article· en· W2104824800 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

VenueBusiness Ethics A European Review · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicIndian Economic and Social Development
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Institute of TechnologyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Tender offerBusinessCall for bidsPlan (archaeology)FinanceComputer scienceMarketingProcurementGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper contributes to the literature of case studies about doing business in conflict zones and post‐conflict zones by presenting the details of holding an international tender process in A fghanistan. The potential importance of A ynak to A fghanistan's economy is explained. The tender plan, rights offered, expectations and bid evaluation process for awarding the right to develop the A ynak copper deposit in A fghanistan are described in detail. This paper shows how an equitable, transparent, objective, standards‐based process approach, incorporating technically and socially responsible development requirements, may be adopted and implemented in countries with difficult conditions.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.005

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.190 · 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