Assessment of Bangladesh Public Procurement System
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bangladesh has enjoyed relatively high \n and stable growth over the last two decades,accompanied by \n rapid poverty reduction. Gross domestic product (GDP) growth \n averagedclose to 6 percent annually since 2000 and, \n according to official estimates, accelerated toover 8 \n percent in FY19. The poverty rate dropped from 44.2 percent \n in 1991 to 14.8 percentin 2016. With per capita gross \n national income (Atlas method) at $1,954 in 2019, \n Bangladeshhas moved into lower middle-income country status \n since 2015. The Government of Bangladesh (GOB)’s Vision 2021 \n aims to propel the country into middle-income status and \n further reduce poverty. The most recent five-year plan \n (FYP16-20) focusses on productive employment for the growing \n labor force and a substantial increase in investment. Other \n key elements of the plan are to ensure good governance and \n pursue for an environmentally sustainable and socially \n inclusive development process. The key objectives of the \n assessment were to: (i) establish a shared understanding of \n thecurrent state of Bangladesh public procurement system \n amongst all stakeholders; (ii) identifythe strengths and \n weaknesses of the overall public procurement system and \n formulateappropriate mitigation measures for the identified \n gaps; and (iii) develop action plan forfuture system \n development in achieving a modern and harmonized procurement \n system withparticular reference to enhanced e-GP, contract \n management, sustainable procurement, andcitizen engagement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it