MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139006481 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14030121

Digital Transformation of Public-Private Partnership Tools

2021· article· en· W3139006481 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Л. А. Толстолесова, Igor Glukhikh, Natal’ya Nikolaevna Yumanova, Otabek Arzikulov

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRussian Foundation for Basic Research
KeywordsPublic–private partnershipGeneral partnershipDigital transformationBusinessPopulationSustainable developmentProcess managementRisk analysis (engineering)FinanceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The need for modern infrastructure as a prerequisite for sustainable development, poverty alleviation, and improvement of the quality of life of the population is a global problem that requires searching for and attracting large amounts of long-term investments. The presence of this problem in recent decades has led to the increasing implementation of complex and costly infrastructure projects through the public-private partnership (PPP) mechanism with high potential for attracting investment. This mechanism, in conditions of limited financial opportunities, allows one to combine the financial resources of the public and private parties for the implementation of major infrastructure projects. The limited use of existing tools at different stages of PPP projects and the increasing need for additional resources make it necessary to consider the possibility of using digital tools that complement traditional ones. For this purpose, the authors analyze existing financing tools, revealing their advantages and disadvantages, and identify and justify the possibility of using digital tools in the implementation of PPP projects. However, digitalization includes not only financing tools but also the development of infrastructure, including digital platforms needed to conduct such operations in the digital environment. As a result, a combined financing toolkit can be formed for each phase of project realization, including traditional and digital tools. The results of this study will become a basis for revealing the directions of the digital transformation of the PPP mechanism.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0120.010
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 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

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital FinanceFrench-language works237,207