MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166915999 · doi:10.1109/hicss.2001.927116

Rural development and food security: a "community informatics" based conceptual framework

2005· article· en· W2166915999 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicICT in Developing Communities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation and Communications TechnologyComputer scienceICTSThe InternetInternet accessInternet of ThingsRendering (computer graphics)Context (archaeology)Conceptual frameworkDigital divideKnowledge managementWorld Wide WebData scienceTelecommunicationsGeographySociologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents an approach to ensuring the accessibility and utility of information and communications technologies (ICTs), within the real context of specific conditions and limitations in the range of developing world contexts and specifically for those in rural areas. Central to issues of use and usefulness of ICT's for rural development is the question of access. Without access, that is the means of making direct use of ICTs and particularly entering into and using the world wide ocean of information and communications capabilities presented by the Internet, little else is possible. A.C. Clement and L.R. Shade (2000) have developed what they call an "Access Rainbow" which is a systematic rendering of the different levels through which access is determined. Their access model is freely adapted by the author.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.418
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicICT in Developing CommunitiesFrench-language works237,207