Ex post evaluation of the management and implementation of cohesion policy 2000-06 (ERDF)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report has been drafted by the European Policies Research Centre (University of Strathclyde) as part of an ex post evaluation of the management and implementation systems for Cohesion policy, 2000-06, which has been commissioned by DG REGIO and which is being managed by EPRC and Metis (Vienna) under European Commission contract no: 2007.CE.16.0.AT.034. The report provides an overview of the main features of management and implementation systems across the EU25 in the 2000-06 period (2004-06 for the EU10) and has been drafted by Professor John Bachtler, Laura Polverari and Frederike Gross, with assistance from Dr Sara Davies and Ruth Downes. The research is based on studies of individual countries undertaken by EPRC together with national experts from each of the EU25 Member States. The authors are grateful for helpful comments from the DG REGIO Evaluation Unit and Geographical Units, in particular Anna Burylo, Veronica Gaffey and Kai Stryczynski. Any errors or omissions remain the responsibility of the authors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.097 | 0.088 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".