MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330035391 · doi:10.1109/idam.2014.6912707

Preliminary study on improving the efficiency of recruiting in a staffing agency using environment-based design methodology: Environment analysis

2014· article· en· W2330035391 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniil Barklon, Hansong Wang, Xinkai Xu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaffingAgency (philosophy)Matching (statistics)The InternetSustainabilityProcess (computing)RevenueComputer scienceScale (ratio)Process managementOrder (exchange)BusinessRisk analysis (engineering)Engineering managementEngineeringFinanceWorld Wide WebEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is a preliminary study on improving the efficiency of recruiting in a staffing agency. Statistics show that the revenue of Canadian recruitment industry has increased sustainably in recent years and the contribution of temporary staffing services have reached approximately two-thirds of the whole recruitment industry sales. However, in the information explosion ages, how to improve the efficiency of recruiting is a critical challenge facing the staffing agencies. Traditional recruitment process is neither effective nor efficient in matching the large pool of candidates. Internet-based recruitment solutions can be very efficient in dealing with large-scale datasets but still have some problems. In order to know better about the design prolem and to gather more requirements, the authors introduce an emerging and promising Environment-Based Design methodology to conduct the environment analysis activities so as to find out the key environment components for the design problem and the relationships between the environment components.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score0.537

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207