MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125920289 · doi:10.3233/sji-190578

How can traditional statistical relationships be redefined through citizen to government partnerships?

2021· article· en· W3125920289 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Javier Andrés Carranza-Torres

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Journal of the IAOS · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstructiveCivil societyGovernment (linguistics)StakeholderWork (physics)Sustainable developmentPublic relationsValue (mathematics)Political sciencePublic administrationBusinessProcess managementManagement scienceComputer scienceEconomicsEngineeringProcess (computing)Politics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The post-2015 Development Agenda proposes to produce much more statistics and data than currently available in the official arena through advanced methods and innovative partnerships. By associating governments and data producers of all kinds it aims to monitor the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The objective of this paper is to explore and analyse one of the 2030 Agenda greatest challenges, i.e. to redefine traditional statistical relationships and processes to associate citizenry as an active stakeholder in the monitoring of SDGs. It proposes innovative ideas linking citizen-to-government and government-to-citizen data partnerships (C2G dp and G2C dp) to the SDG requirements. The paper portrays and analyses the benefits for parties of alternative projects from Uganda, Canada and Uruguay. The C2G dp Stats Up program is featured as an additional case study, describing its achievements and shortcomings. This contribution constitutes a valuable co-creation case to fill the gap of lack of partnering skills. In sum, the paper presents the added value of a constructive socio-technical approach to SDG 17. Final conclusions propose a roadmap to support the work of National Statistical Offices to address complex challenges to walk the talk of the 2030 Agenda harnessing the crucial role of civil society in their plans.

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)0.197
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.275
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1970.275
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0100.038
Scholarly communication0.0380.054
Open science0.0060.037
Research integrity0.0100.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.520
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.108 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical Journal of the IAOSSame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207