Enhance the Quality of the Management System for BOT road Transport Investment Project in Viet Nam
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The PPP (Public Private Partnership) contract has been applied in Vietnam for 13 years, initially achieved certain success, ensuring the project's goals, contributing to providing the basis technical infrastructure for the economic development of the country. But from the perspective of investment efficiency, socio-economic efficiency, people's interests are not achieved, there are too many shortcomings, group interests are rampant, public opinion and public opinion are against the total investment. Investment, fee rates, environment, ... State audit, Government inspectors discovered hundreds of projects with problems that had to cut down on toll collection time, toll rates, and staff involved in the project. reasons for hiding revenue, tax evasion, etc. In addition, there are other violations such as quality, maintenance, and environment during the exploitation period that must be adjusted.From the perspective of state management, the form of PPP investment is now fully operational, with a full system of management and control tools, but the socio-economic efficiency is still low. The transparency of the project is being opposed by the public, the ability to attract investment is poor, especially foreign investors lack confidence and do not participate. That shows that the "quality of management system" is not effective, there should be a solution to improve the quality of the management system for the type of investment in the form of PPP.
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 | 0.025 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".