MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2524720479

On Non-Profit Privately-Run Higher Education Institutions Receiving Public Finance Subsidy: From the Perspective of Pareto Improvement Theory

2016· article· en· W2524720479 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Guowei He

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in sociology of science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInnovation Policy and R&D
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubsidyPublic financeEconomicsPareto principleFinanceGovernment (linguistics)Profit (economics)Public economicsBusinessMicroeconomicsMarket economyMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The subsidy provided by government public finance to non-profit higher educational institutions is a process of public resources for reallocation, and the concrete application of the Pareto improvement theory in the practice of government public finance resources allocation. The Pareto improvement theory is of importance guidance significance to the scientific and rational adjustment and allocation of resources. As to the allocation of public finance in higher educational institutions, the Pareto improvement theory means that the public finance resources obtained by state-run higher educational institutions is not reduced, and non-profit privately-run higher educational institutions also obtain certain public finance subsidy, which promotes the rational allocation of public finance resources. The realization of Pareto improvement of public finance resources in higher educational institutions is favorable. That non-profit privately-run higher educational institutions obtain government public finance subsidy contributes to rational allocation of public resources, and improves the circumstances of all sides, which are a multi-win arrangement.

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.131
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in sociology of scienceSame topicInnovation Policy and R&DFrench-language works237,207