MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2278533372 · doi:10.51644/9781554581429-013

Donor Coordination and Good Governance: Donor-Led and Recipient-Led Approaches

2007· book-chapter· en· W2278533372 on OpenAlexaff
Paolo de Renzio, Sarah Mulley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsInstitute on Governance
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceBusinessFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Paolo de Renzio is a Research Fellow with the Centre for Aid and Public Expenditure at ODI.He joined CAPE after six years spent working as an economist and policy advisor in Papua New Guinea and as a public sector specialist, lecturer and independent consultant in Mozambique.His research focuses on the interplay between aid policies and modalities and public finance management systems in developing countries.His current work spans from issues related to aid architecture and mutual accountability, to donor conditionalities and general budget support, to assessing the quality of PFM systems and their reform.

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)0.011
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.013
Scholarly communication0.0160.007
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207