MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Annexe: Impact Stories - Maximising the Impact of Global Development Research – A New Approach to Knowledge Brokering

2021· report· en· W4234678424 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilArts and Humanities Research CouncilEconomic and Social Research CouncilForeign, Commonwealth and Development OfficeDepartment for International DevelopmentUniversity of BathGlobal Challenges Research FundUniversity of LiverpoolUniversity of CambridgeEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilUK Research and InnovationOverseas Development InstituteInternational Development Research CentreGovernment of the United KingdomOxfam AmericaUniversity of NottinghamImperial College LondonLeeds Beckett University
KeywordsDevelopment (topology)Knowledge managementProcess managementComputer scienceData scienceBusinessMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

is the Communications and Impact Manager at IDS.She leads the communications for a portfolio of international development research projects and manages a team of research communications specialists.She has worked on a range of issues within the sector including health and nutrition, child labour, and gender equality with a focus on translating evidence and knowledge into accessible and engaging communications to achieve sustainable impact.As part of the Impact Initiative communications team, she has helped shape the impact storytelling process, led high-level policy events, and developed cross-synthesis policy papers.Louise Clark is the Monitoring Evaluation and Learning (MEL) Manager at IDS and has been mapping social networks for over 15 years to visualise how different groups interact and collaborate and how these relational structures facilitate knowledge exchange and support positive development outcomes.Her work involves all stages in the MEL cycle, from the strategic design of MEL frameworks and approaches, creating MEL processes and products, supporting monitoring and reporting to managing evaluations and facilitating spaces for reflection and learning.She has a particular interest in Theory of Change as a tool to support stakeholder engagement and build shared ownership of project outcomes to deliver strategies that promote behaviour change.Her facilitation supports projects to explore causal pathways and challenge assumptions about how change happens to promote reflection, learning, and improvement.

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)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0130.012
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.005

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 head0.729
GPT teacher head0.673
Teacher spread0.056 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEvaluation and Performance Assessment→French-language works237,207→