MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399457677 · doi:10.1016/j.cities.2024.105151

Artificial intelligence and the local government: A five-decade scientometric analysis on the evolution, state-of-the-art, and emerging trends

2024· article· en· W4399457677 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCities · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsState (computer science)Government (linguistics)Regional sciencePolitical scienceData scienceGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has significantly impacted various sectors, including public governance at the local level. However, there exists a limited understanding of the overarching narrative surrounding the adoption of AI in local governments and its future. Therefore, this study aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the evolution, current state-of-the-art, and emerging trends in the adoption of AI in local government. A comprehensive scientometric analysis was conducted on a dataset comprising 7112 relevant literature records retrieved from the Scopus database in October 2023, spanning over the last five decades. The study findings revealed the following key insights: (a) exponential technological advancements over the last decades ushered in an era of AI adoption by local governments; (b) the primary purposes of AI adoption in local governments include decision support, automation, prediction, and service delivery; (c) the main areas of AI adoption in local governments encompass planning, analytics, security, surveillance, energy, and modelling; and (d) under-researched but critical research areas include ethics of and public participation in AI adoption in local governments. This study informs research, policy, and practice by offering a comprehensive understanding of the literature on AI applications in local governments, providing valuable insights for stakeholders and decision-makers. • Maps the landscape of artificial intelligence (AI) adoption in local government (LG) • Advancements in the last decades brought the Blooming Era of AI adoption in LG • Main AI adoption purposes: decision support, automation, prediction, service delivery • Main AI adoption areas: planning, analytics, security, surveillance, energy, modelling • Under-researched but critical areas: responsibility and ethics of AI adoption in LG

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.717
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.234 · 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