MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134222447 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2013.09.021

Evaluating the quality of in-service trainings for employees of Islamic Azad University (Buin-Zahra Branch) using CIPP model

2013· article· en· W2134222447 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aboulfazl Safieepoor, Reza Shafizadeh, Behzad Shoghi

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamQuality (philosophy)Service qualityManagementService (business)PsychologyComputer scienceBusinessMarketingPhilosophyTheologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an empirical investigation to study the relationship between future profitability and abnormal accruals on selected firms from Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE). The study selects 223 firms from TSE market over the period 2007-2011. Using the regression analysis, the study shows there was no meaningful relationship between abnormal earnings and future profitability when the level of significance is five percent. There are also seven sub-hypotheses associated with the proposed study of this paper. The results indicate that while there were no meaningful relationship between firm size, capital expenditure, earnings quality and earning forecasted error on one side and future earnings, the study confirms a significance relationship between ratio of book value to equity as well as market leverage and future earnings.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.402
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.109 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207