Dynamic Comprehensive Evaluation of the Performance of Introducing Foreign Investment in Jiangsu/EVALUATION DYNAMIQUE INTÉGRALE DE LA PERFORMANCE DE L'INTRODUCTION DES INVESTISSEMENTS ÉTRANGERS À JIANGSU
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This research focuses on using a dynamic comprehensive evaluation model to assess the performance of introducing foreign investment in 13 cities in Jiangsu province of China. The model breaks the traditional evaluation model of a weighted average, using a second weighted average method. On the basis of the status in Jiangsu, five assessment indicators are chosen. Then the paper summarizes and classifies the changes of all cities according to the dynamic comprehensive value. Combined with the status and trends of introducing foreign investment in Jiangsu, the paper gives a detailed analysis to the evaluation results with a view to grasp the dynamic changes of introducing foreign investment in Jiangsu and to make an objective assessment. Key words: dynamic comprehensive evaluation, introducing of foreign investment, performance evaluation Resume: Cette recherche se concentre sur l'utilisation d'une dynamique integrale modele d'evaluation pour evaluer la performance de l'introduction des investissements etrangers dans 13 villes de la province de Jiangsu en Chine. Le modele rompt le modele d'evaluation traditionnel d'une moyenne ponderee, en utilisant une seconde methode de la moyenne ponderee. Sur la base des statuts a Jiangsu, cinq indicateurs d'evaluation sont choisis. Puis, le document resume et classifie les changements de toutes les villes conformement a la valeur dynamique integrale. Combine avec le statut et la tendance de l'introduction des investissements etrangers a Jiangsu, le document donne une analyse detaillee pour les resultats de l'evaluation en vue de saisir les changements dynamiques de l'introduction des investissements etrangers a Jiangsu et de faire une evaluation objective. Mots-Cles: evaluation dynamique integrale, introduction des investissements etrangers, performance evaluation (ProQuest: ... denotes formulae omitted.) Jiangsu province of China has maintained more attractive to foreign investors for many years by the virtue of superior investment environment and good industrial basement. Recently, the total amounts of introducing foreign investment ( shortened by IFI ) in Jiangsu leaped to the top due to the improvement of the quantity and quality of foreign capital continuously and the optimization of the structure of foreign investment gradually. End to 2006, the province has approved 78,757 foreign investment projects, contracted foreign investment amounted to more than 2801 billion U.S. dollars and the actual foreign investment amounted to 1203 billion U.S. dollars. Thus the evaluation of the performance of IFI has aroused many scholars concern. But most evaluation methods are qualitative, only a few are from the perspective of quantitative view. 1. LITERATURE REVIEW In the quantitative methods , scholars generally makes empirical study from two ways: One is foreign investment performance indicator; another is factor analysis. Ge Shunqi4(2003) studied the performance of IFI in 31 provinces with the method of foreign investment performance indicator. Guo Xiaohe, Dai Pingping5(2005) also used the same method to study the FDI performance in Guangxi. Huang Wanting; Zhang Ailong and Lee guangjiu6(2004) used factor analysis model to study the quantity and quality of foreign investment in 13 cities of Jiangsu province. Wang Xinhua, Chaoyang7(2006) used the same model to assess the performance of IFI in 31 provinces of China. To sum up , the way of using performance indicators to evaluate the effect is too simple, because the performance of IFI is not only reflected in the relative performance of foreign inflows but also in many other aspects, such as labor productivity and profit rate in foreign-funded enterprises and so on. Factor analysis model divides the variables into some related groups based on the drop-dimensional idea that makes the multiple indicators integrate into a few comprehensive factors to evaluate. But the coefficient of the load factors sometimes may be a negative factor weight that makes the economic meaning obscurity. …
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.
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 | 0.014 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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 it