MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

An Empirical Study on Impact of College Carve-Out Education on Entrepreneur Intention

2012· article· en· W3122495960 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Guifang Zhang, Luqing Fan, Ziqi Chu, Cheng Peng

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher education of social science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntrepreneurship educationEntrepreneurial educationEntrepreneurshipSet (abstract data type)PsychologyPublic relationsStructural equation modelingPolitical scienceSociologyBusinessMarketingMathematics educationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Carve-out education is becoming increasingly important in current days since the business set up by college students produce a significant effect on the economic growth. Entrepreneur intention, part of carve-out education, is receiving more and more attention. Based on educational systems over the world and the datum of Chinese college students, the article studies the impact of the college carve-out education on students’ entrepreneur intention with the structure equation modeling (SEM). The research shows that carve-out education can enhance entrepreneur intention indirectly by updating students’ knowledge, cultivating their entrepreneurial abilities and reinforcing their determination. The colleges and other educational organizations should also provide plenty of training projects and encourage students to participate in company operation. In addition, some successful entrepreneurs should be invited to give lectures in colleges. Key words : Entrepreneurship Education; College Student Entrepreneurship; Entrepreneurship Intention

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)0.009
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher education of social science→Same topicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences→French-language works237,207→