MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112183225 · doi:10.3968/11899

Analysis of the Integration of Community Education in the Rural Community Governance System of Xiaoshan from the Perspective of Nurturing New Farmers

2020· article· en· W3112183225 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

VenueCanadian social science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Environment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic growthHarmony (color)Corporate governanceJurisdictionCommunity educationUrbanizationOrder (exchange)Rural areaCommunity organizationPerspective (graphical)Political scienceSociologyBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Community education includes a variety of educational activities that are open for all residents and rely on the educational resources of the community. Its main purposes are to promote the development of residents, keep the community safe, and maintain its social harmony (Yang, 2019, pp.5-8). Community education makes full use of the available educational resources in order to improve the overall manner and quality of life of residents and promote regional economy and social development. It is inherently compatible with the rural community governance system in terms of participants and pursuits. Xiaoshan is a district where the urbanization of rural areas is progressing rapidly with fast social and economic development under the jurisdiction of Hangzhou, Zhejiang. The community education has started early and contributed to local economy and rural governing much.

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 score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.583

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.247 · 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