MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225755388 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v12n3p134

The Role of Effective Communication Skills in Professional Life

2022· article· en· W4225755388 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bushra Sumaiya, Subodh Srivastava, Vipin Jain, Ved Prakash

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultinational corporationDisseminationField (mathematics)Relevance (law)Communication skillsBusinessPublic relationsKnowledge managementComputer scienceMedical educationTelecommunicationsPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Every young person in the world aspires to be efficacious in their chosen field. Today's business environment is very competitive. If an individual wish to survive in this period, he or she must have an adequate understanding of procedures and field-related abilities. Communication skills are extremely important in the business world. Engineers' roles are expanding as a result of growing demands and professional hurdles. Professional authorities in multinational corporations demand their staff to have excellent communication skills in addition to technical proficiency. The efficiency with which employees absorb and disseminate knowledge determines their performance. The relevance of communication skills in a person's profession and technological field is highlighted in this study. Whether it's with your bosses and co-workers, or with clients and customers, every profession necessitates human connection. Effective communication skills may help you facilitate these interactions with others, which will allow you to operate more efficiently and successfully.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations25
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207