Thinking Strategically: An Economic Game of the Egyptian Constitution with Regards to Higher Education (Presentation Slides)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The motivation for this research is to devise a new Egyptian higher education scheme which is more efficient, sustainable, and minimizes opportunity costs, in contrast to the current system which is non-sustainable, generates social losses, carries large opportunity costs, and is not economically efficient for long run development. The economically efficient outcome in solving the education paradox in Egypt is for the education system to be left for market forces to dictate the efficient amount of enrollment, and when this system is enforced, 60% of individuals will enroll in higher education by efficient self-selection, and the government will have to regulate the education market by offering a subsidy to 40% of eligible individuals to be enrolled in higher education. If left alone, those individuals will choose to forgo higher education and will cause a sizeable social loss to society. Consequently, the two education schemes of free education for all, and free market education, are both socially inefficient. A 60/40 split as outlined above is deemed efficient.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".