MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3146314340 · doi:10.29173/iasl8124

Information Literacy as a National Agenda: A Case Study of Singapore

2021· article· en· W3146314340 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Margaret Butterworth

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocioeconomic Development in Asia
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforcePopulationRevenueEconomicsPromotion (chess)Economic growthDevelopment economicsPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Singapore is a small country in South East Asia with a population of some 3.7 million. It achieved independence from Britain in 1965 and since then has made remarkable progress as a nation, so much so that other countries are now looking closely at its policies with a view to discovering its secrets of success. While the policies attracting attention range from Singapore's national pension scheme to the way in which traffic flow is controlled, the major area of interest here is to investigate the country's promotion of information literacy.
 Singapore is largely devoid of natural resources, so there has always been an emphasis on seeing people as capital. As in many Asian countries, cheap labour was at first the basis for building strong manufacturing industries to earn revenue by exporting goods to richer nations. Economic growth would occur as long as inputs of labour and of capital investment went on growing, but eventually this would slow because the sources of these inputs are finite. Krugman (1994) described this as the "perspiration theory": success was based on working harder, not working smarter. Krugman's writings aroused hostile reaction in many Asian countries, but even he did not predict the extent of the economic crisis in the region during the late 1990's. By this time, though, Singapore's leaders were working on the problem and laying the foundations that would produce a workforce with something more to offer than perspiration.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.537

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicSocioeconomic Development in AsiaFrench-language works237,207