MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2175277794 · doi:10.19030/iber.v4i4.3585

Risk Management In Public And Private Partnership IT Projects: An International Study

2011· article· en· W2175277794 on OpenAlex
Lise Préfontaine

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business & Economics Research Journal (IBER) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPublic-Private Partnership Projects
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipRisk managementBusinessPrivate sectorPublic–private partnershipPolitical riskPublic sectorProcess (computing)PoliticsPublic relationsFinanceRisk analysis (engineering)Economic growthPolitical scienceEconomicsEconomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Managing public and private partnerships (PPPs) projects represents a major challenge. Fifteen case studies have been conducted in the United States, Europe and Canada to identify the most typical risks incurred in PPP projects supported by advanced IT. Results show the presence of two sources of risks: external risks linked to the environment and internal risks associated either with the project, with the participating organizations and with the collaboration process. At the external level, political risks appear most predominant whereas at the internal level, risks linked to the relational dynamic are mentioned the most. The study also reveals that, unlike the private sector, the public sector does not cope with risk using an economic logic.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.219
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.150 · 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