MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950464458 · doi:10.1080/22041451.2019.1601493

Intersections between connectivity and digital inclusion in rural communities

2019· article· en· W2950464458 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication Research and Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisconnectionInclusion (mineral)Context (archaeology)Diversity (politics)PoliticsRural communitySocial exclusionRural areaSociologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceGeographyEconomic growthSocioeconomicsSocial scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As societies become more connected and digitalised, evidence shows that differences in infrastructure quality are growing between urban and rural areas. The constant catch-up of infrastructure and existing social exclusion factors create a double jeopardy in rural areas. Furthermore, as digital technologies are increasingly embedded into economic, political, social, and personal lives, the disadvantages that occur from disconnection manifest differently depending on the social context of an individual, organisation or community. There is a need to improve our understanding of specific contexts of digitally excluded groups and develop targeted policies and programmes. Drawing from fieldwork in rural communities in Australia, this article examines the relationship between limited connectivity, the local context and socio-economic outcomes in rural areas. We suggest a customised policy framework that is responsive to the diversity and uniqueness of local contexts in connectivity and digital inclusion.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.314 · 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