MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6968667735 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15632191

SPECIFIC METHODOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES OF ORGANIZING DUAL EDUCATION AT THE "INDUSTRY-ENTERPRISE-HIGHLIGHT" LEVEL IN TRAINING ENGINEERS

2025· article· en· W6968667735 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, Innovation and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsBombardier (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDual (grammatical number)Training (meteorology)SamaraDual purpose

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ushbu maqolada oliy ta’lim muassasalarida muhandislar tayyorlashda “Tarmoq-korxona-oliygoh” darajasida dual ta’limni tashkil etishning xususiy metodologik tamoyillari ishlab chiqilganligi va undan foydalanish yuqori samara berishligi haqida ma’lumotlar berilgan. OTM larda muhandislar tayyorlashda “Tarmoq-korxona-oliygoh” darajasida dual ta’limni joriy etish amaliyotining tahlili uni rivojlantirishning meyoriy-huquqiy bazasini yanada takomillashtirish zarurligi aniqlanganligi bayon qilingan.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.014
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.255
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.130 · 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
GenreMethods

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 venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicEducation, Innovation and Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207