MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396651541 · doi:10.5430/ijba.v15n2p18

The Human Side of Digital Technology: Supporting the Inclusion of Refugees in Higher Education Through Blockchain-backed EQPR

2024· article· en· W4396651541 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Plinio Limata, Federico Ceschel, Chiara Finocchietti, Lucia Marchegiani, Serena Spitalieri

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Administration · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOrganizational and Employee Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainRefugeeInclusion (mineral)Financial inclusionComputer scienceComputer securityBusinessInternet privacySociologyPolitical scienceLawGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spectrum of digital technologies that impact Higher Education (HE) is broad. This study explores the potential of Blockchain (BC) technology in the personalized learning path creation and data exchange in the learning processes. The flexibilization of education and digitizing student data through Blockchain may contribute to a more inclusive and sustainable HE system. According to the EU, the Blockchain supports sustainability in four main aspects: cybersecurity, accountability, transparency, and traceability. These aspects are also a driver of social impact and a higher capacity to include disadvantaged groups, such as refugees. Therefore, it is essential to start a debate between scholars and professionals about how the actors in the HE system engage in a collective meaning-making effort to sustain the adoption, diffusion, and use of BC for HE. The paper focuses on the experience of CIMEA DiploMe and EQPR for the recognition of refugees' qualifications. Through a collective consensus-making and awareness-raising effort, the blockchain-backed EQPR could be perceived as a critical tool to foster inclusion within the HEIs and enhance their social outreach.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.296 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business AdministrationSame topicOrganizational and Employee PerformanceFrench-language works237,207