MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405442077 · doi:10.3390/app142411750

From Recruitment to Retention: AI Tools for Human Resource Decision-Making

2024· article· en· W4405442077 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAI and HR Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity Canada West
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOnboardingComputer scienceAnalyticsDocumentationPersonalizationKnowledge managementData sciencePsychologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HR decision-making is changing as a result of artificial intelligence (AI), especially in the areas of hiring, onboarding, and retention. This study examines the use of AI tools throughout the lifecycle of an employee, emphasizing how they enhance the effectiveness, customization, and scalability of HR procedures. These solutions streamline employee setup, learning, and documentation. They range from AI-driven applicant tracking systems (ATSs) for applicant selection to AI-powered platforms for automated onboarding and individualized training. Predictive analytics also helps retention and performance monitoring plans, which lowers turnover, but issues such as bias, data privacy, and ethical problems must be carefully considered. This paper addresses the limitations and future directions of AI while examining its disruptive potential in HR.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.559
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.122
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.228 · 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