MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409604928 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-330

Design of Rule Extraction and Optimization Algorithms in Employee Performance Evaluation in Data Mining Environment

2025· article· en· W4409604928 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAI and HR Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceData miningExtraction (chemistry)AlgorithmChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, a data-driven assessment framework integrating multi-criteria decision making, association rule mining and fuzzy clustering methods is proposed to address the scientific and objective needs of rule extraction and optimization in employee performance assessment.The TOPSIS model is improved by triangular fuzzy numbers to realize the objective ranking of business performance.The Apriori algorithm is improved to mine the association rules between competency and performance.The empirical results show that Employee 3 is ranked in the excellent grade with 101.32% task completion rate and 0.8323 relative proximity.The questionnaire results of competency quality had a significant impact on appraisal with a confidence level of 84.3%, while technical title and education were not sufficiently correlated with a confidence level of <30%.The fuzzy decision tree model generated 25 classification rules with a confidence level higher than 63.2%.And combined with the work attitude index with a weight of 0.2913 to complete the comprehensive performance assessment, the results show that the overall performance score of the employees in this enterprise is 0.81362, which is a good grade.This study makes the performance appraisal more objective, precise and efficient, and at the same time expands the application scope of data mining technology in enterprise management.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicAI and HR TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207