MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807192595 · doi:10.17501/icpsd.2017.4103

AN EXAMINATION OF MULTIDIMENSIONAL POVERTY PROFILE IN LIMPOPO, SOUTH AFRICA: IMPLICATION FOR USING CBMS GENERATED DATA IN LOCALISING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS, 2030

2018· article· en· W2807192595 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Grace Bicha Oloo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Poverty and Sustainable Development · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicdemographic modeling and climate adaptation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research CentreGovernment of Canada
KeywordsPovertySustainable developmentComputer scienceEconomic growthPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study sought to profile multidimensional poverty in Tzaneen Local Municipality in Limpopo province in South Africa. The objective was to profile multidimensional poverty and further demonstrate the implication of Community-Based system (CBMS) generated data in localizing Sustainable Development goals 2030 at the municipality level. Consultative and CBMS design approach was adopted in the study. Administered household questionnaire was used to census 1,534households in Tzaneen Local Municipality Ward1. Indicators for poverty measurements were generated in partnership with local municipality and aligned to relevant sustainable development goals 2030. Data was captured using Excel software and imported to CSPro6.3 software for analysis. Community-Based Monitoring-National Research Database (CBMS-NRDB) software was used to generate poverty maps. Community validation approach was used to authenticate the study findings. We conclude that CBMS can generate multidimensional poverty profile and maps which can be used to localize Sustainable Development goals at municipality levels. We recommend that the local municipality use CBMS generated data to profile multidimensional poverty and as a baseline for localizing Sustainable Development goals 2030.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Conference on Poverty and Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicdemographic modeling and climate adaptationFrench-language works237,207