Сравнительный анализ международного опыта реализации социально-инновационных проектов
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid growth of social problems in society caused by the irrational use of resources, inefficiency of existing institutions, and transformation of value orientations has led to the search for new solutions in this area based on the analysis of international experience. The purpose of this study is to compare and identify the features of the formation of social innovation in international practice, particularly, in Canada, China, Spain and Italy. The article analyzes social innovation projects in the countries under review. The following criteria have been used for comparison: a customer, an innovator, his/her goal, the form of project implementation, and the source of funding. The methodological base of the research includes methods of systematization and comparative analysis. The scientific articles published in Web of Science, Scopus, E-library, international reports and statistics are base of research. Based on the analysis, the authors formulate the features of the formation of social and innovative activities in international practice and show the possibility of applying this experience in the Russian economy. The theoretical significance of the results obtained consists in the development of the theory of social innovations. Its practical significance lies in the possibility of using this experience for the development of social and innovative projects in the Russian economy.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".