MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095333380 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v9n8p67

Exceptions to Copyright for Scientific and Educational Purposes

2020· article· en· W3095333380 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Роза Иосифовна Ситдикова, Ekaterina Sergeevna Starostina, Elvina Rustemovna Kashapova, Sergey Alexandrovich Baryshev

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Innovations and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKazan Federal University
KeywordsNormativeField (mathematics)Strategic planningRussian federationProcess (computing)Political scienceSpace (punctuation)Management sciencePublic relationsProcess managementBusinessEngineering managementRegional scienceComputer scienceSociologyEngineeringMarketingLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, it was tried to consider the current state of normative support for the development of strategic planning documents in the field of Russian education. The strategy for the development of education (DoE), as an industry document of strategic planning, has not been adopted in the Russian Federation (RF) to date. The article attempts to generalize the developments in this area, considers several international documents and projects of strategies for the development of Russian education (DRE), national strategies focused on them. The analysis of regional strategy for the DoE, which is either component of strategies for socioeconomic development of the region, or separate concepts that are focused on municipal development strategies. Due to the lack of a strategic document at the Federal level, regional development concepts are mostly aimed at solving regional problems in the field of education, at a process approach, and, in fact, are not focused on solving breakthrough problems and taking into account all-Russian and global challenges. It is concluded that the Russian educational system cannot develop effectively in the course of planning only national projects that have their own time horizon; to solve this problem, a strategy for the DRE space is necessary, which can provide guidelines for the development of each educational organization.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.074
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.074
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0150.009
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0120.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2860.418

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.311 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicEducational Innovations and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207