MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211128162 · doi:10.1596/27870

Regulatory Capacity Review of Rwanda

2010· book· en· W4211128162 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersReseau canadien de recherche respiratoireNorth Dakota Soybean Council
KeywordsCapacity developmentPolitical scienceGeographyEnvironmental planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regulatory reform has emerged as an
\n important policy area in developing countries. For reforms
\n to be beneficial, regulatory regimes need to be transparent,
\n coherent, and comprehensive. They must establish appropriate
\n institutional frameworks and liberalized business
\n regulations; enforce competition policy and law; and open
\n external and internal markets to trade and investment. This
\n report analyses the institutional set-up and use of
\n regulatory policy instruments in Rwanda. It is one of five
\n reports prepared on countries in East and Southern Africa
\n (the others are on Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Zambia), and
\n represents an attempt to apply assessment tools and the
\n framework developed by the Organization for Economic
\n Cooperation and Development (OECD) in its work on regulatory
\n capacity and performance to developing countries.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.284
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMiddle East and Rwanda ConflictsFrench-language works237,207