Constructing a big data modular evaluation system for college students’ innovation and entrepreneurship education in universities: enhancing evaluation efficiency and accuracy
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the evaluation system of college students' innovation and entrepreneurship education is constructed and the indexes are assigned by combining the hierarchical analysis method.After that, PSO algorithm is introduced in the optimization of weights and thresholds of BP neural network, the neural network model using particle swarm optimization (PSO-BP) is constructed, and the process of PSO algorithm optimization of BP neural network is described.It was found that the combined weight of five indicators, namely, "examination results of innovation and entrepreneurship courses, entrepreneurial experience, participation in centralized entrepreneurship training camps, obtaining financial support from entrepreneurship funds, and participation in innovation or entrepreneurship clubs", accounted for more than 10%, while the combined weight coefficients of the rest of the indicators were all below 0.1.Compared to the BP model, the PSO-BP model has better network performance and its training samples have higher correlation with the test samples.In addition, the PSO-BP model can be used for predicting data prediction after 9 iterations of training, and the maximum relative error between the actual value and the expected value of the model network test output is very small (<1.4272%), which makes the model ideal.After PSO optimization PSO-BP model has almost no prediction error (<0.34%), which can improve the evaluation efficiency and accuracy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it