MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416304308 · doi:10.62477/jkmp.v25i5.578

A Machine Learning Model to Evaluate Digital Financial Services Adoption and Sustainable Women Empowerment

2025· article· W4416304308 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mukesh Pal, Hemant Gupta, Krunal Soni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Knowledge Management and Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial inclusionEmpowermentFinancial servicesFinTechDimension (graph theory)Technology acceptance modelValue (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Financial services enabled by digital technology can help address the challenges faced by women by overcoming the barriers of proximity and cost. Despite notable advancements in digital financial inclusion in India, women still face obstacles in accessing and utilizing digital financial services. Design/methodology/approach: A machine learning-based self-efficacy-value adoption model (SVAM) is applied to study the influence of self-efficacy and perceived value on the intention to adopt digital financial services (DFS). Likewise, a machine learning-based threshold decision theory was applied to examine the relationship between digital financial services access and the dimension of sustainable women empowerment in rural India. Findings: The results suggest that enhancing user experience and highlighting the benefits of DFS can increase adoption rates among women, thus promoting their economic and social empowerment. Originality/value: In this study, the authors examine an integrated framework based on supervised machine learning to access digital financial services for rural women. They are among the first to apply a self-efficacy-based value adoption model through machine learning to explore this topic. The adoption of digital financial services significantly enhances women's economic, social, and psychological empowerment in rural areas. This evidence-based study will inform policy discussions on developing a gender-sensitive strategy to promote the adoption of digital financial services among women.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 Knowledge Management and PracticeSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207