An integrated artificial intelligence model for efficiency assessment in pharmaceutical companies during the COVID-19 pandemic
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
The spread of coronavirus disease around the world has had an immense impact on most economic sectors. Yet amid the turmoil and chaos from the worldwide pandemic, one industry is thriving noticeably. The coronavirus disease is a once in a lifetime business opportunity for pharmaceutical companies. This study presents an artificial intelligence method composed of optimization and machine learning. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is used to measure productivities and efficiencies of pharmaceutical companies during the COVID-19 pandemic using the additive model in window analysis, the BCC (Banker-Charnes-Cooper) model, and the CCR (Charnes-Cooper-Rhodes) model. The three models are assessed using DataStream financial information with research and development (R&D) investment. The results indicated the additive model's superiority in window analysis, followed by the BCC and CCR models. In the end, some of well-known data mining algorithms, based on the suggested data, have been evaluated in various tools to find the most efficient tool and algorithm.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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