MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165310280 · doi:10.11159/iccste21.160

Conceptual Framework for a Decision-Making Model to Select thePublic-Private Partnership (PPP) Structure for Urban Rail Transit inJakarta

2021· article· en· W3165310280 on OpenAlex
Retno Ambarsari, Sutanto Soehodho, R. Jachrizal Sumabrata

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

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPublic-Private Partnership Projects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrban rail transitPublic–private partnershipGeneral partnershipPublic transportTransit (satellite)BusinessTransport engineeringComputer scienceConceptual modelRail transitFinanceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PPP scheme has been widely recognized as a cooperation between government and private sector to provide public service, both in developed and developing countries. In contrast with developed countries, PPP implementation faces several challenges in developing countries. Private sectors in developing countries tend to deliver an unsolicited PPP project; however, it is difficult for the government to define the appropriate PPP structure for a specific project due to lack of knowledge and experience. This paper focuses on developing a conceptual framework for a decision-making model to select the PPP structure model for urban rail transit. A clearly defined PPP structure at the early stages allows both parties' allocation of responsibility and risk. It provides exact direction on the PPP project implementation, commonly established in a long-term contract period. It is expected that the multi-criteria decision-making tools by using the AHP approach may contribute as a guideline to support decision-makers in selecting the appropriate PPP structure for urban rail transit, particularly on unsolicited PPP proposal.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.554
Threshold uncertainty score0.875

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.236 · 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