Оценка эффективности деятельности государственных органов Республики Казахстан: особенности действующей модели
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is devoted to assessing the efficiency of the activities of state executive bodies in the framework of the process of reforming public service. The main problems of assessing the efficiency of management, as well as the mechanism of dialogue between society and the state as the most important stage in the construction of a service-oriented state and the formation of a professional state apparatus are considered. The author states that the process aspects of government activities in all areas of assessment are built and systematized, and also grouped into three stages. The introduction of an annual assessment system allowed us to identify systemic problems in the functioning of the state apparatus. It is worth noting that the methodological basis of the Kazakhstan assessment system is formed taking into account international experience, in particular, the system of management efficiency of the Canadian state authorities (MAF), which, according to international experts, has established itself as one of the most effective, is taken as a basis. The criteria and directions of assessment are not static and are adjusted in accordance with current issues and trends in the development of the state apparatus. The methodological basis of the evaluation system is constantly updated in accordance with the current systemic problems of public administration. Over the years of operation, the assessment system has proved its viability, has allowed to identify problems existing in the activities of state bodies, and to improve their efficiency, as well as significantly improve the quality of public services. The results of the assessment served as the basis for the development and adoption of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On State Services”.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.006 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".