MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169223506

Guide to the Measurement of Government Productivity

2002· article· en· W2169223506 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueInternational productivity monitor · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityGovernment (linguistics)TreasuryEconomicsIndex (typography)Public economicsEconometricsTotal factor productivityStochastic frontier analysisGovernment spendingMacroeconomicsComputer scienceProduction (economics)Political science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The measurement of government productivity poses a challenge for economists. The lack of a marketed output and the multidimensional nature of objectives for government agencies in particular make the measurement of productivity in government more difficult than in the business sector. This article by Andrew Hughes of the New South Wales Treasury in Australia provides a guide to the issue of productivity measurement in government. Hughes provides a non-technical overview of the different quantitative techniques that can be used to gauge government performance, including index number techniques such as partial factor productivity and total factor productivity; statistical techniques such as ordinary least squares and stochastic frontier analysis; and mathematical techniques such as data development analysis. He gives a number of examples to illustrate the use of these techniques. Hughes concludes that general government agencies have much to gain from the application of quantitative techniques to the measurement of their economic performance.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.259 · 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