A Guidebook on The Compliance Review Process of ADB�s Accountability Mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Asian Development Bank (ADB) is mandated to help reduce poverty in Asia and the Pacific and promote social and economic development across the region.ADB works toward this goal by helping developing member countries improve the quality of life of their people who comprise most of the world's poor.It extends loans, grants, technical assistance, and equity investments that seek to catalyze sustainable and all-inclusive economic growth across the region.ADB strives to ensure that the projects it funds will not result in any direct, adverse, and material harm to the communities and people concerned, by adhering to ADB's operational policies and procedures, which are aligned with international standards and practices.As an institution involved in sustainable development, one of ADB's priorities is preventing further impoverishment from involuntary resettlement and environmental degradation, especially of the poor.ADB aims to effect compliance with operational policies and procedures in the course of the design, processing, and implementation of ADB-assisted projects, from the preparatory phase until operation.Well-developed audit, supervision, quality control, and evaluation systems prevent and address most issues that occur during the planning and implementation of ADBassisted projects.ADB has also instituted its accountability mechanism that complements these systems, particularly with a policy compliance review function as a grievance redress platform of "last resort" for affected people and communities.First established in 2003, the Accountability Mechanism was updated and improved with the issuance of the Accountability Mechanism Policy 2012. Society for Social Improvement and Sustainable Transformation (ASSIST).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.049 | 0.088 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.099 | 0.100 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".