Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2404.01552

The use of the open innovation paradigm in the public sector: a systematic review of published studies

Abstract

The use of the open innovation paradigm has been, over the past years, getting special attention in the public sector. Motivated by an urban environment that is increasingly more complex and challenging, several government agencies have been allocating financial resources and efforts to promote open and participative government initiatives. As a way to try and understand this scenario, a systematic review of the literature was conducted, to provide a comprehensive analysis of the scientific papers that were published, seeking to capture, classify, evaluate and synthesize how the use of this paradigm has been put into practice in the public sector. In total, 4,741 preliminary studies were analyzed. From this number, only 37 articles were classified as potentially relevant and moved forward, going through the process of data extraction and analysis. From the data obtained, it was possible to verify that the use of this paradigm started to be reported with a higher frequency in the literature since 2013 and, among the main findings, we highlight the reports of experiences, approach propositions, of understanding how the phenomenon occurs and theoretical reflections. It was also possible to verify that the use of open innovation through social media was one of the pioneer techniques of engagement between the public sector and citizens. In conclusion, the reports confirm that the main challenges of this paradigm applied to the public sector are associated with their respective bureaucratic aspects, therefore lacking a bigger reflection on the procedures and methods to be used in the public sphere.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Joel Alves de Lima Júnior, Kiev Gama, Jorge da Silva Correia Neto. 2024-04-09. The use of the open innovation paradigm in the public sector: a systematic review of published studies. https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.01552

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Towards interactive evaluations for interaction harms in human-AI systems

Current AI evaluation methods, which rely on static, model-only tests, fail to account for harms that emerge through sustained human-AI interaction. As AI systems proliferate and are increasingly integrated into real-world applications, this disconnect between evaluation approaches and actual usage becomes more significant. In this paper, we propose a shift towards evaluation based on \textit{interactional ethics}, which focuses on \textit{interaction harms} - issues like inappropriate parasocial relationships, social manipulation, and cognitive overreliance that develop over time through repeated interaction, rather than through isolated outputs. First, we discuss the limitations of current evaluation methods, which (1) are static, (2) assume a universal user experience, and (3) have limited construct validity. Drawing on research from human-computer interaction, natural language processing, and the social sciences, we present practical principles for designing interactive evaluations. These include ecologically valid interaction scenarios, human impact metrics, and diverse human participation approaches. Finally, we explore implementation challenges and open research questions for researchers, practitioners, and regulators aiming to integrate interactive evaluations into AI governance frameworks. This work lays the groundwork for developing more effective evaluation methods that better capture the complex dynamics between humans and AI systems.

cs.CY

Enhancing Large Language Model-Based Systems for End-to-End Circuit Analysis Problem Solving

LLMs have shown strong performance in data-rich domains such as programming, but their reliability in engineering tasks remains limited. Circuit analysis is particularly challenging because it requires both multimodal understanding and precise mathematical reasoning. This paper presents an enhanced end-to-end circuit problem-solving framework using Gemini 2.5 Pro as the backbone model for scalable engineering-education applications. We systematically evaluate Gemini 2.5 Pro on undergraduate circuit-analysis problems and identify two major failure modes: circuit-recognition hallucinations, especially source-polarity errors, and reasoning-process hallucinations, such as incorrect current-direction assumptions. To reduce recognition errors, we integrate a fine-tuned YOLO detector with OpenCV-based processing to isolate voltage and current sources for polarity re-identification. To mitigate reasoning errors, we introduce an ngspice-driven verification loop that supports iterative refinement with optional human feedback. On 83 problems, the proposed pipeline achieves 97.59% accuracy, compared with 79.52% for baseline Gemini. Across four hand-drawn diagram variations, accuracy improves from 60.61%--71.21% to 89.39%--92.42%, with statistically significant gains (p<0.005). On 43 problems from a different textbook, accuracy increases from 58.14% to 83.72%, further supporting cross-textbook generalizability. Error analysis shows that circuit recognition remains the dominant source of residual failures, particularly under varying diagram representations. Overall, the framework substantially improves the robustness, scalability, and generalizability of LLM-based circuit problem solving for engineering education and practical circuit analysis.

cs.CY

GreenPassport: Request-Level Carbon Accounting for Cross-Border AI Inference

AI inference often crosses regional boundaries as prompts travel to remote data centers and generated tokens return to users. Regional averages cannot represent the resulting differences in serving hardware, electricity, and network delivery. Request-level accounting needs a common boundary for the service, serving site, route, local comparator, uncertainty, and data provenance. GreenPassport Carbon Accounting (GPCA) associates these inputs with each request. It estimates serving and route carbon, then selects a reporting level from the available documentation. Our public-data implementation covers data-center instances, accelerators, model families, electricity mixes, routes, and cloud-region carbon intensity. Against six accounting baselines and four energy-prediction baselines, GPCA reduced median absolute percentage error by 56.3% and median absolute error by 15.5% relative to EcoLogits under the aligned accelerator-energy boundary. It produced zero rule overstatement in the deterministic conformance tests. In the buyer case, the clean-electricity CN-West scenario produced 0.0148 gCO2e per request, 88% below the local service at 0.1220 gCO2e per request.

cs.CY