MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989650809 · doi:10.5430/wje.v9n6p7

A Quantitative Study on Student Financial Aid of a Local Undergraduate College in China

2019· article· en· W2989650809 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jingjing Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Educational Reforms and Inequalities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)ChinaInvestment (military)Local governmentPer capitaGovernment (linguistics)Higher educationBusinessFinancePsychologyMathematics educationEconomic growthPolitical scienceEconomicsSociologyEngineeringPublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study took the student aid data of a normal university in northern Jiangsu Province in 2018 as the object ofstudy, and studied the characteristics of student aid work in local colleges. Through the analysis of the data, it isfound that the characteristics of student aid in local undergraduate colleges and universities in China are as follows:the main source of investment is government, supplemented by colleges, and the amount of social aid is small andunstable; the function of the aid work is still mainly to help the poor, supplemented by awards for the students withexcellent academic performance, and aid for poor students without extra requisites are large in amount. The projectsrewarding outstanding students from the college funds are few in ordinary local colleges and universities, with lowreward amount per capita; the willingness of college students to apply for student loans is low, as loans need to berepaid, the attraction of loans to poor students who can afford partly of the cost is weak, compared with manynon-repayment and non-academic performance requirements aid projects.

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)0.004
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of EducationSame topicGlobal Educational Reforms and InequalitiesFrench-language works237,207