Оценка стратегий и программ в системе государственного планирования Республики Казахстан
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose. To study the process and contents the assessment of strategic and program documents, the regulatory impact assessment in the Republic of Kazakhstan, Russia and identification of further perspectives of assessment development considering international experience. Methods. A retrospective analysis of the state planning development is carried out, the element of strategic and program documents evaluation, of regulatory impact assessment in the Republic of Kazakhstan as a separate system is considered. Results. On the basis of studying the Kazakhstan’s experience and international practices problems impeding further development of evaluation are identified. For performance-based management system it is proposed to introduce a comprehensive assessment system covering projects, programs, departments, as well as performance of individual employees. To launch such an assessment system a new Law on Government performance assessment can be drafted this recommendation is based on the experience of the U.S., Canada, Japan and other countries. Scientific novelty. Scientific novelty lies in exploring interrelation of the assessment genesis of the strategic and program documents from the moment of formation of the state planning system in the Republic of Kazakhstan, and also in the justification of the missing elements of the assessment system on the basis of the best international practices.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.011 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".