Modeling the Harmony of Economic Development of Regions in the Context of Sustainable Development
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
The study simulates the harmony of economic development of the regional economic systems in the context of sustainable development for the following successive stages: separation of indicators from the array of statistics in the regional context; standardization of indicators of economic development of the regional economic systems; use of correlation analysis to determine the integrated index of economic development of the regional economic systems; taking into account the coefficients of influence of indicators on the integrated index of economic development of the regional economic systems; determining the harmony of economic development of the regional economic systems using the hyperbolic Fibonacci cone; approbation of modeling the harmony of economic development of the regional economic systems. In accordance with the outlined stages, the proposed method was tested for the regions of Ukraine and an example was given in relation to the economic component of sustainable development. The highest integrated index of economic development is observed in Kyiv, and the lowest in Luhansk region, the difference between the values is 17.6 times. According to the results of calculations, the regions are grouped according to the harmonies of economic development, and cartographic analysis is given.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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