MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782403352 · doi:10.5539/ach.v10n1p48

The Development of Saudi Arabia in King Fahd’s Era

2018· article· en· W2782403352 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdulmohsen Al Saud

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Culture and History · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocioeconomic Development in MENA
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImplementationPolitical scienceIslamEconomic growthBusinessEconomyEconomicsHistoryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the development of Saudi Arabia during King Fahd’s era through research which highlights the challenges and reasons behind the decline in achieving five year plans. Saudi Arabia is one of those Middle Eastern countries, based on a traditional Islamic Law system, where the process of innovation is extremely slow. The purpose of the study was to focus on the policy implementations and improvements effected during the era of King Fahd and how they changed the economy of the Kingdom. The study also uncovered some of the achievements and limitations of the initiative to educate women in their chosen fields. The impact of the innovative development plans were explored, with education, industrial development, and trade identified as core focuses during the King Fahd era. The focus on these three aspects essentially resulted in the development of Saudi Arabia’s economic processes, although some failures suggested the need for further improvements through the application of new strategies. Moreover, there was a need for developmental procedures in education, industry and trade areas that ultimately affected the economy of the Kingdom.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Culture and HistorySame topicSocioeconomic Development in MENAFrench-language works237,207