MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204530549 · doi:10.20952/revtee.v14i33.16491

The age structure of the scientific and pedagogical staff: data from the regions of Russia

2021· article· en· W3204530549 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Iuliia Pinkovetskaia

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Tempos e Espaços em Educação · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Innovations and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoveltyOriginalityQuarter (Canadian coin)Age structureAge groupsDistribution (mathematics)Teaching staffHigher educationStatistical analysisMathematics educationWork (physics)PsychologyDemographyMedical educationGeographySociologyPedagogyPolitical scienceSocial scienceStatisticsMedicineMathematicsPhysicsSocial psychologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of our study was to evaluate the indicators characterizing the age structure of the scientific and pedagogical staff of universities and other higher educational institutions in the regions of Russia. In the course of the work, the indicators characterizing the specific weights of teachers belonging to five age groups from 25 to 34 years, from 35 to 44 years, from 45 to 54 years, from 55 to 64 years and over 65 years in the total number of teachers working in higher education institutes were evaluated. The study used official statistical information for 82 regions of Russia. We used the density functions of the normal distribution as models. The results of the research allowed us to draw conclusions: the largest number (more than a quarter) of teachers was observed in the group from 35 to 44 years; 24% of teachers were aged from 45 to 54 years; 20% of teachers were slightly older. The least number of teachers was observed in the age groups over 65 years and from 25 to 34 years. The proposed methodological approach and the results obtained have originality and scientific novelty, since the assessment of regional features of the age structure of scientific and pedagogical personnel in the regions of Russia has not been carried out before.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Tempos e Espaços em EducaçãoSame topicEducational Innovations and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207