MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1653134827 · doi:10.3968/6357

An Ethical Analysis of Difficulties of Modern Enrollment Management and Evaluation Mechanisms

2015· article· en· W1653134827 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Baocheng Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher education of social science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Educational Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)ChinaObject (grammar)Process managementEngineering ethicsComputer scienceBusinessKnowledge managementEngineering managementPolitical scienceEngineeringArtificial intelligenceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The education development is the essence of dynamic knowledge architecture. With the increases of college entrance examination candidates, institutions and running points, China’s education has been in the rapid development since the 1990s. It has been became a hot explore object of educators to put forward the higher requirements of Enrollment Management, to further improve the enrollment management process and to establish appropriate evaluation mechanisms. Thus, this paper analyzes the characteristics of the modern recruitment, puts forward the difficulties and the measures of the enrollment management process and elaborates the related guarantee methods. These principles can provide some references of modern recruitment and promote China’s education development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.112
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.113
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1120.113
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.375 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher education of social scienceSame topicInnovative Educational TechniquesFrench-language works237,207