MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206155640 · doi:10.1109/mcom.001.2100478

Enabling Universal Connectivity via Data-Driven Policymaking: A North American Case Study

2021· article· en· W4206155640 on OpenAlexaff
Janaki Parekh, Chaitanya Parekh, Amir Ghasemi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Magazine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsCommunications Research Centre Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital divideComputer scienceLeverage (statistics)Big dataData scienceBroadbandInternet accessWork (physics)The InternetBusiness modelTelecommunicationsInternet privacyBusinessWorld Wide WebMarketingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lack of universal broadband connectivity is becoming a significant hurdle in today's growing digital world. Despite considerable efforts via numerous grant programs, subsidies, private investments, and research initiatives, the disparity between urban and rural communities continues to widen. The COVID-19 pandemic has further emphasized the importance of affordable high-speed Internet to access many social and economic opportunities including remote work, distance learning, and telemedicine. Nevertheless, with the rise of big data, it is now possible to better understand this digital divide from a data-driven perspective. In this article, we leverage a massive crowd-sourced dataset of smartphone device measurements to extract key insights regarding the current state of the digital divide in North America. Specifically, we quantify the extent of the gap, examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and explore possible socioeconomic factors that may be influential in operator business models. Finally, we demonstrate how crowdsourced datasets can be leveraged to monitor the impact of emerging technologies, to better direct federal broadband funds, and to make more informed spectrum policy decisions.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Communications MagazineSame topicICT Impact and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207