Economic Causes of Extremism Intellectual (Thoughts) Views of Graduate Students Using Multivariate Statistical Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study investigated the impact of the economic reasons on the intellectual (thoughts) extremism, and the statement of the most important indicators in the economic factor that lead to extremism from the views of graduate students. The study problem based on the following question: What are economic factors leading to the extremism of the intellectual(Thoughts)? Correlation coefficient, Principal component analysis (PCA), varimax (F) rotated factor analysis, and dendrogram cluster analysis (DCA) were assessed for the economic impacts that leads to extremism(Thoughts). Multivariate statistical analysis of the dataset and correlation analysis suggested that the strong positive correlations are commonly associated in the poverty and lack of interest in remote areas for major cities Center. Multivariate statistical analysis such as principal component analysis, varimax rotated factor analysis, and dendrogram cluster analysis allowed the identification of three main factors controlling that lead to extremism from the views of graduate students. The extracted factors are as follows: low living expenses, poverty and substantial deprivation, and unequal opportunities and unemployment associations related to prevalence of corruption phase.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".