A DEA-ANN-based analytical framework to assess and predict the efficiency of Canadian universities in a service supply chain context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This research is about embedding service-based supply chain management (SCM) concepts in the education sector. Due to Canada's competitive education sector, the authors focus on Canadian universities. Design/methodology/approach The authors develop a framework for evaluating and forecasting university performance using data envelopment analysis (DEA) and artificial neural networks (ANNs) to assist education policymakers. The application of the proposed framework is illustrated based on information from 16 Canadian universities and by investigating their teaching and research performance. Findings The major findings are (1) applying the service SCM concept to develop a performance evaluation and prediction framework, (2) demonstrating the application of DEA-ANN for computing and predicting the efficiency of service SCM in Canadian universities, and (3) generating insights to enable universities to improve their research and teaching performances considering critical inputs and outputs. Research limitations/implications This paper presents a new framework for universities' performance assessment and performance prediction. DEA and ANN are integrated to aid decision-makers in evaluating the performances of universities. Practical implications The findings suggest that higher education policymakers should monitor attrition rates at graduate and undergraduate levels and provide financial support to facilitate research and concentrate on Ph.D. programs. Additionally, the sensitivity analysis indicates that selecting inputs and outputs is critical in determining university rankings. Originality/value This research proposes a new integrated DEA and ANN framework to assess and forecast future teaching and research efficiencies applying the service supply chain concept. The findings offer policymakers insights such as paying close attention to the attrition rates of undergraduate and postgraduate programs. In addition, prioritizing internal research support and concentrating on Ph.D. programs is recommended.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".