An Exposition on Principals’ Influence in Real Estate Negotiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The conflicting interest between principals’ and the intermediary role played by Estate Surveyors and Valuersduring real estate negotiation could prone the latter to influence from these principals’ as evident in valuation.The research which entailed a survey of 159 Estate Surveyors and Valuers in Lagos metropolis was analyzedwith the use of descriptive statistics and the Relative Important Index. It was discovered that potential tenants aremost apt in influencing real estate negotiation which is usually carried out with the use of reward powers andinformation power where pecuniary gains are offered to Estate Surveyors and Valuers in order to accomplishtheir whims while access to information by these principals are also used against the Estate Surveyor and Valuerworking in an unfamiliar terrain respectively.The researchers therefore opines that a wakeup call by both the Nigerian Institution of Estate Surveyors andValuers and the Estate Surveyors and Valuers Registration Board of Nigeria in curbing the prevalence of thisinfluence will help preserve the integrity of the Estate Surveying and valuation profession.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".