MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036146395 · doi:10.1080/15387216.2020.1783338

“Smart” quarantine and “blanket” quarantine: the Czech response to the COVID-19 pandemic

2020· article· en· W3036146395 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Petr Kouřil, Slavomíra Ferenčuhová

Bibliographic record

VenueEurasian Geography and Economics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCOVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAkademie Věd České RepublikyGovernment of Alberta Ministry of Transportation
KeywordsQuarantineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CzechPandemicBusinessContact tracingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By the end of May 2020, the Czech response to the COVID-19 pandemic has been recognized as a “success” following the fast introduction of strict nationwide preventive measures, nicknamed a “blanket quarantine”. This article focuses on the alternative and rival concept of a “smart quarantine”, which emerged at the beginning of the lockdown. Inspired by Korean and Singaporean anti-COVID-19 smart city solutions, a group of ICT professionals volunteered to develop a system that promised to help limit the spread of the infection and, at the same time, ease the nationwide lockdown within a foreseeable time. The idea was received enthusiastically, yet, two months later, smart solutions are still not fully integrated. This article reconstructs the story of the smart quarantine in Czechia and suggests considering possible societal consequences of unsatisfactorily valid smart tracing methodologies. Rather than seeing lockdown and smart solutions as opposite approaches to the current risk, it shows that a hybrid strategy may be considered, if not necessary, especially in contexts where smart solutions have been previously applied only to a limited extent.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEurasian Geography and EconomicsSame topicCOVID-19 Digital Contact TracingFrench-language works237,207