Research on the Improvement of Village Governance Efficiency Based on Blockchain Technology
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is known that China is in the critical “triple overlap” period of the history of social transformation, the fourth industrial revolution, and new globalization. As a disruptive technology, blockchain has solved the “trust construction” and causing a revolution in the social governance model. The article uses blockchain technology as a means to solve the problems of the existing rural governance structure and governance capability system, analyzes the mechanism and implementation bottleneck of blockchain technology, and proposes countermeasures and policy suggestions to improve the effectiveness of village governance, such as the distributed characteristics and the traceable characteristics of the blockchain can be used to build a multi-level response and personalized service integration and a self-organized operation mechanism in rural areas to promote governance responsibility mechanisms and reduce the risk of information fragmentation, data uncertainty, and governance control risks, etc. These policies and suggestions provide a good theoretical basis and method guidance for China’s rural revitalization strategy.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it