Strategic Choices in Developing a Geospatial Web 2.0 Application for Rural Economic Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ways in which we use the Internet have changed in recent years. Compared to consuming online content passively, users are more frequently adding their own content, often with a place-based aspect to it. This volunteered geographic information can represent local perspective in a rich way, and can be quickly shared with others. This case study presents the development of an online mapping application built using newly available web development tools. This application was used as part of a rural economic development initiative in the region of Acton, Quebec. The mapping application, GeoActon, provided a way for local business owners to add information on their business to a map that was embedded in an economic development website. We describe three strategic choices made in the development of GeoActon that reflect the organizational constraints often found within rural areas: minimizing development costs, user verification of contributed information, and strengthening linkages with partners. We anticipate that these choices can provide insights into the future development of Geoweb applications in rural areas. Keywords: Geoweb, volunteered geographic information, participation, information technology
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".