MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309935958 · doi:10.1080/13504851.2022.2146645

Risk transfer and value for money by infrastructure project type

2022· article· en· W4309935958 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yasuo Nishiyama

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Economics Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPublic-Private Partnership Projects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcurementValue for moneyProject financePublic sectorPrivate sectorBusinessGeneral partnershipPrincipal (computer security)Public–private partnershipPublic infrastructureFinanceValue (mathematics)EconomicsPublic economicsComputer scienceMarketingEconomyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In deciding whether an infrastructure project should be delivered using traditional procurement or a public-private partnership (PPP), the public sector estimates the project’s value for money (VFM), which serves as the principal justification for adopting PPP. It is well known that VFM arises primarily from risk transfer, that is, the risk of (for example) potential cost overruns is transferred from the public sector to the private sector under PPP, thereby creating cost savings to the public sector. Using a unique source of PPP data, Infrastructure Ontario, Canada, this paper investigates an issue not examined systematically and quantitatively in the literature: how the contribution to VFM arising from risk transfer varies from project type to project type, and why.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.090
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.090
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Economics LettersSame topicPublic-Private Partnership ProjectsFrench-language works237,207