State Regulation of Digital Technologies for Sustainable Development and Territorial Planning
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
In the current context, the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) faces the challenge of ensuring sustainable development and effective state regulation.One key issue is to foster coordination and cooperation among different regions and EAEU member states in the development of digital technologies.This study aims to propose directions for state regulation of digital technologies and their integration into a comprehensive mechanism for sustainable development and planning, within the concept of smart territories.We introduce the concept of smart territories as an outcome of sustainable development and planning, enabled by the adoption of digital technologies.Based on an expert survey, we identify key parameters for sustainable development and planning in smart territories, including stakeholder interests, modern challenges for territorial communities, and success factors.We conclude that the integration of digital technologies into smart territories can provide new standards for quality of life and economic development, while preserving the natural resources of these territories.Based on a balanced use of resources, our study highlights the need for a comprehensive strategy for the sustainable development of smart territories, addressing economic, social, and environmental issues.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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