MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409605138 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-272

Evaluation of the Balance of Management Power Distribution in Universities Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process

2025· article· en· W4409605138 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEducational Reforms and Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Graduate EducationStrong
KeywordsAnalytic hierarchy processBalance (ability)Distribution (mathematics)Power (physics)Process (computing)HierarchyComputer scienceProcess managementBusinessOperations researchMathematicsPolitical sciencePsychologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to realize the optimal distribution of university management power under the overall planning and scheduling mode, an evaluation model of university management power distribution balance based on analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is put forward, and a method based on the integration of Internet thinking and technology, a sampling model of characteristic information of university management power distribution balance under the overall planning and scheduling mode, According to the quantitative recursive analysis results of the sample data of university management power distribution balance under the overall planning and scheduling mode, the information fusion of university management power distribution under the overall planning and scheduling mode is carried out, the association rule fusion characteristic distribution parameter set of the panel data of university management power distribution balance under the overall planning and scheduling mode is extracted, and the data fusion of university management power distribution balance under the overall planning and scheduling mode is carried out by combining the joint statistical probability density distribution detection method.Combined with the piecewise linear estimation method, this paper constructs the statistical characteristics of the equilibrium evaluation of university management power distribution under the overall planning and scheduling mode, analyzes the equilibrium characteristics of university management power distribution under the overall planning and scheduling mode according to the quantitative recursive analysis results of prior samples, extracts the equilibrium characteristics of university management power distribution under the overall planning and scheduling mode, and clusters the information of the equilibrium characteristics of university management power distribution under the overall planning and scheduling mode by structural characteristics extraction and fusion clustering methods.According to the results of distributed integration of features, it evaluates the balance of management power distribution in colleges and universities under the overall planning and scheduling mode.The simulation results show that this method has high accuracy and good confidence in evaluating the balance of management power distribution in colleges and universities under the overall planning ✉Corresponding author.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 topicEducational Reforms and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207