MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889026832 · doi:10.5539/ass.v14n9p8

A Comparative Study of Student Organizations in Mainland China and Hong Kong Universities - Based on the Perspective of Innovation and Entrepreneurship Associations

2018· article· en· W2889026832 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bao-shan Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicStrategic Planning and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJinan University
KeywordsMainland ChinaCommunismLeagueChinaEntrepreneurshipWork (physics)Political scienceMainlandPerspective (graphical)Public relationsSociologyEngineeringGeographyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to thoroughly apply the spirit of 18th National Congress of Communist Party of China, strengthening the work of youth under the new situation is the inner requirement of the Communist Youth League. Furthermore, it plays a needing role in doing the youth work under the new situation. As a bridge between college students and society, student organization is an important part of student affairs in universities. In addition, employing the advanced experience in organization management provides theoretical and practical significances to the work of the Communist Youth League in the new situation. Based on the student organization of Mainland and Hong Kong Universities, the project discusses the different performance of Mainland and Hong Kong Universities with the method of comparative study. From the view of student organizations of innovation and entrepreneurship, the project aims to offer the reference to student organizations in Mainland.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicStrategic Planning and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207