Trend 2010 - 2011. National Science Foundation. Higher Education Research and Development Survey – R&D Spending: R&D Expenditures: Federally Funded R&D Total | Country: USA | Institution: RUTGERS UNIVERSITY-NEW BRUNSWICK/PISCATAWAY, 2010-2011. Data-Planet™ Statistical Ready Reference by Conquest Systems, Inc. Dataset-ID: 073-001-018.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
National Science Foundation (2015). Higher Education Research and Development Survey – R&D Spending: R&D Expenditures: Federally Funded R&D Total | Country: USA | Institution: RUTGERS UNIVERSITY-NEW BRUNSWICK/PISCATAWAY, 2010-2011. Data-Planet™ Statistical Ready Reference by Conquest Systems, Inc. [Data-file]. Dataset-ID: 073-001-018. Dataset: Reports the total amount of research and development (R&D) expenditures at colleges and universities in the United States that was funded by the federal government, by state and institution. The Higher Education Research and Development (HERD) Survey, successor to the Survey of Research and Development Expenditures at Universities and Colleges, is the primary source of information on research and development (R&D) expenditures at United States colleges and universities. The dataset presented here provides statistics on source of funds and R&D expenditures by field of research at US universities and colleges, for the nation in total, and by state and institution. Several changes were implemented in the survey design with the FY 2010 survey: Since FY 2010, the target population for the HERD Survey has included nonprofit postsecondary institutions with bachelor’s or higher degree programs in any field and R&D expenditures of at least $150,000 in any field. Before FY 2010, the population included only institutions with R&D spending and degree programs in S&E fields. Institutions that performed R&D in only non-S&E fields were excluded from the population. Also beginning with FY 2010, each campus headed by a campus-level president, chancellor, or equivalent now completes a separate survey rather than combining its response with other campuses in a university system. As a result of this step, the overall number of academic institutions in the population increased from 711 in FY 2009 to 742 in FY 2010. For changes in survey questions and variables over time, see the technical documentation. Also, note that the FY 1997 survey was the last one conducted as a sample survey; since FY 1998, the survey has been a census of all known eligible universities and colleges. Annual data are available for FY 1972–2012, with the exception of FY 1978, which covered a different population and used different questions than preceding or subsequent surveys and is therefore not comparable to other years. The Higher Education Research and Development (HERD) Survey utilizes a unique set of institution codes. IPEDS unit codes utilized by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) have been assigned to HERD participating institutions, in order to allow comparability with NCES datasets. In a small set of cases where HERD and NCES treat main campuses and branch campuses as unique vs separate entities, data values for branch campuses have been rolled into the main campus data. Category: Education, Government and Politics Source: National Science Foundation The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent federal agency created by the United States Congress in 1950 "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense…" NSF is the funding source for approximately 20 percent of all federally supported basic research conducted by US colleges and universities. In many fields such as mathematics, computer science and the social sciences, NSF is the major source of federal backing. NSF typically issues limited-term grants to fund specific research proposals that have been judged the most promising by a rigorous and objective merit-review system. Most of these awards go to individuals or small groups of investigators. Others provide funding for research centers, instruments, and facilities. http://www.nsf.gov/ Subject: Expenditures, Funding, Science & Technology, Colleges, Research and Development, Federal Government, Government Spending, Universities
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.077 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".