MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

OPTIMAL EVALUATION INDEX SYSTEM AND BENEFIT EVALUATION MODEL FOR AGRICULTURAL INFORMATIZATION IN BEIJING

2018· article· en· W2794229040 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 Journal of Robotics and Automation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicRemote Sensing and Land Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBeijing Municipal Science and Technology CommissionBeijing Academy of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences
KeywordsBeijingInformatizationIndex (typography)AgricultureComputer scienceBusinessChinaGeographyTelecommunicationsWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The level of informatization is an important indicator of a country or region's level of economic development, and many domestic and foreign scholars have studied this topic. Informatization is seen as a developing social phenomenon, with both national and regional characteristics, therefore the foreign standard systems are not entirely suitable for the development of an information society in China. This paper establishes new indexes and designs an optimal evaluation index system according to the characteristics of informatization. The optimal index system is more suitable for the current development of informatization in China. Using this index system, we measure the informatization level in Beijing from 2003 to 2012. Using the Cobb-Douglass model, we construct an information benefit evaluation model to verify the positive effect of informatization on economic development in Beijing. To further study the relationship between the informatization evaluation index and the urban-rural income gap, we conduct a regression between the information evaluation index and the urban-rural income gap. It provides a quantitative scientific basis for the study of the impact of information technology on economic and social development plans, enabling improved government decision-making.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.246 · 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