MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609497210 · doi:10.5539/hes.v7n2p51

Analysis of Ordinary Public Fund and Its Impact on the Quality of Academic Programs in the Higher Education in the Subsystem of the Polytechnic Universities in Mexico

2017· article· en· W2609497210 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pedro Salazar Monroy, José Luis Arcos-Vega, Juan José Sevilla García

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBusiness, Innovation, and Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Higher educationFund raisingBusinessPublic fundingPublic relationsMedical educationPolitical scienceEconomicsEconomic growthPublic administrationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2015, there was the need of making this study to determine the efficient and effectiveness’ management for making decisions in respect to the ordinary fund allocations and their impact on the quality of the academic programs into the Polytechnic engineering universities in Mexico. This analysis is very important for providing essential evidence to improve the granting of financial resources to these institutions for the educational activities. Front to a novel educational system of higher education is essential to evaluate the quality of it to achieve its goals. The information evaluated shows important findings, in regards to the institutions for having more evaluable academic programs than non-assessable academic programs. Being the first ones, which receive a larger fund for their operation.

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)0.012
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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.255
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.132 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicBusiness, Innovation, and EconomyFrench-language works237,207