MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387807282 · doi:10.23977/aetp.2023.071405

Innovation in Labor Education for College Students in the Era of Artificial Intelligence

2023· article· en· W4387807282 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hang Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Technologies in Various Fields
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsciousnessProductivityFace (sociological concept)Quality (philosophy)Social consciousnessSocial changePersonal developmentPolitical scienceSociologyEconomic growthPublic relationsPsychologyEconomicsSocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today's world, artificial intelligence (AI) is a crucial direction in global technological development, permeating various sectors of society and even replacing manual labor in certain fields, significantly enhancing societal productivity. Simultaneously, people's reliance on AI is increasing, leading to a shift in the labor paradigm and a gradual weakening of labor consciousness. College students are high-quality talents cultivated by the party and the state, and their labor consciousness not only determines their own development but is also crucial for societal progress, especially in the face of significant challenges posed by the development of AI on their employment prospects. Therefore, innovating the way labor education is provided to college students to enhance their labor consciousness, skills, and quality, and fostering innovative development in labor education practices for college students is essential to help them adapt to the evolving era, lead societal development, and achieve comprehensive personal development.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.389 · 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
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Educational Technology and PsychologySame topicAdvanced Technologies in Various FieldsFrench-language works237,207