MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064084798 · doi:10.1016/j.proeps.2009.09.247

Building international business relations: China-Canada education MODEL

2009· article· en· W2064084798 on OpenAlexaffabout
Prosper Bernard, Michel Plaisent

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Earth and Planetary Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXuzhouInternshipChinaPresentation (obstetrics)DelegationExecutive educationInternational businessInternational relationsTechnology transferJoint (building)Engineering managementManagementPolitical scienceEngineeringPublic relationsBusiness educationHigher educationKnowledge managementComputer scienceLawCivil engineeringEconomicsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This short paper is a summary of the keynote speech that will be given by Dr. Prosper Bernard in Xuzhou at the 6th International Conference on Mining and Technology at the China University of Mining and Technology. The presentation will refer to concrete examples that show ways to create long term business relations and technology transfer. One example is the relationship created by a joint MBA program between China University of Mining and Technology (CUMT) and the University of Quebec (UQAM). Another example is that CUMT receives every year a delegation of executive MBA participants from Quebec who meet the Xuzhou MBA participants. Another way is to create international internships for our graduates. International Business and Technology transfer start with `RELATIONS``. It is suggested that education creates the best relations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia Earth and Planetary ScienceSame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207