MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210469690 · doi:10.18192/clg-cgl.v3i1.194

United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) Policy Statement: 'Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development'

2011· article· en· W4210469690 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Committee on Culture of United Cities And Local Governments

Bibliographic record

VenueCulture and Local Governance · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Innovation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSummitPillarStatement (logic)Sustainable developmentPolitical sciencePublic administrationEconomic growthGeographyLawEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On November 17, 2010, the Executive Bureau of United Cities and Local Governments approved a policy statement on Culture as the Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development, in the framework of the ‘World Summit of Local and Regional Leaders’, the third World Congress of UCLG, held in the City of Mexico.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0100.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.005

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCulture and Local GovernanceSame topicRegional Development and InnovationFrench-language works237,207