Life Balance of Russian Students (by the Example of Students of the Finance Department of Plekhanov Russian University of Economics)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Students have to optimize their life balance in order to get pleasure from life. Unfortunately, not all young people can cope with this difficult but important process efficiently. From the perspective of personal satisfaction and public recognition in studies, at work, and in everyday life students sometimes feel life imbalance which has a strong negative impact on their personal and professional development. The article reveals the peculiarities of students’ life balance formation under conditions of their intensive activity in studies, at work, and in everyday life. In studies the students’ balance between their personal assessment of acquired knowledge, the nature of teaching, material rewards, etc. and public recognition by other students, professors, university administration, etc. is defined. At work the students’ balance between their personal satisfaction from the obtaining financial independence, acquiring professional skills, benefiting family, etc. and public recognition of these students by colleagues, administration, family, classmates, professors, etc. is revealed. In everyday life the students’ balance between their personal satisfaction from the creating comfortable living conditions, formation of the basics of modern everyday lifestyle, etc. and their public recognition by hostel administration, roommates, friends, relatives, etc. is described.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".