MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092306025 · doi:10.47670/wuwijar201822fco

Decision Maker’s Tool: Statistics, the Problem Solver

2018· article· en· W3092306025 on OpenAlexaff
Faith Cajudo Orillaza

Bibliographic record

VenueWestcliff International Journal of Applied Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsWycliffe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness statisticsDescriptive statisticsSolverComputer scienceSummary statisticsEconomic statisticsBusiness intelligenceProcess (computing)Probability and statisticsParametric statisticsOperations researchData scienceStatisticsEngineeringMathematicsData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary objective of every investor is to see how his money grows. No matter where one decides to plant or invest his money, there is an inevitable process that follows. The important thing is to closely monitor events and record every detail of information. Unless there is a proper system, issues will build and may become difficult to manage. This is the main reason why there are tools which are necessary to use when planting the seeds for investments. These tools are packed into one parcel and referred to as statistics. The term statistics will refer to descriptive and inferential statistics, probability, parametric and non-parametric tests, time series, and business intelligence. This paper will define statistical gears which are normally used by business managers to gather and analyze data for planning and decision-making. It will further highlight how the elements of statistics can build a strong pillar to run a business and alleviate potential challenges through the use of a tool known as the problem solver.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.008

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
GenreCommentary

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 venueWestcliff International Journal of Applied ResearchSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207