MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156457789 · doi:10.1145/2463728.2463787

Transforming city government

2012· article· en· W2156457789 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Taewoo Nam, Theresa A. Pardo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Cities and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAccountabilityGovernment (linguistics)Smart cityTraceabilityService delivery frameworkService (business)BusinessProcess (computing)Public serviceProcess managementPublic relationsKnowledge managementPublic administrationComputer scienceComputer securityMarketingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the transformation of a city government led by a 311 program, which provides a consolidated channel for non-emergency services and information. The paper first discusses the concept of "smart city" as a foundation for the examination of the 311 program as a practice of government innovation. The paper then presents the details of the 311 program as instantiated in the City of Philadelphia. In-depth interviews with Philadelphia City government officials and managers responsible for creating and operating the City's 311 system (Philly311) offer insights into the contributions the system is making to a more efficient, effective, transparent, accountable, and collaborative city government. Performance data provided by Philly311 enables more efficient resource allocation and informed decision making. Philly311 is credited with making the process of service delivery more transparent to the public, and providing traceability of requested services which imbues service departments with a sense of accountability. Service level agreements are providing measurable standards of municipal services and are used to support accountability in terms of service status. Regular reviews of service level agreements and content of the system are also recognized as promoting interdepartmental collaboration. 311 systems are broadly recognized as powerful tools to engage residents in improving their neighborhoods. Institutionalizing interdepartmental collaborations emerged from the interviews as a critical capability in advancing from the initiation stage of Philly311-like systems to operations and refinement.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.012
Scholarly communication0.0140.007
Open science0.0010.014
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.175 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations29
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Cities and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207