MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005066448

Perfil del personal y su desempeño laboral en la gerencia de creditos de la asociacion mujeres en acción (AMA) , Trujillo - 1er. trimestre del 2017

2017· dissertation· en· W7005066448 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuerenati · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Position (finance)Work (physics)Descriptive statisticsAssociation (psychology)Data collectionAction (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study was carried out in order to determine the “PROFILE OF THE
\nPERSONNEL AND ITS PERFORMANCE IN THE CREDIT MANAGEMENT OF THE
\nWOMEN IN ACTION ASSOCIATION (AMA), TRUJILLO - 1ER. QUARTER OF 2017.
\nThe statement of the problem is: Is the personnel profile adjusted to their work performance in
\nthe Credit Management of the Women in Action Association (AMA), Trujillo - 1er. Quarter of
\n2017? Whose research hypothesis is: The profile of the personnel required by the position is
\nadjusted to their work performance in the Credit Management of the Women in Action
\nAssociation (AMA).
\n
\nThe correlational descriptive design was used, using the survey technique, and as a
\nquestionnaire instrument, the same that was validated through the application of the Cronbach
\nAlpha coefficient.
\nLikewise, the personnel directly involved in the Credit Management of the Women in Action
\nAssociation (AMA), made up of a total of 17 workers, were considered as a representative
\nsample to analyze the job profile and the work performance in the institution.
\n
\nThe results of the research have allowed the analysis of job profile and job performance in the
\nCredit Management of the Women in Action Association (AMA), in the city of Trujillo,
\nduring the 1st. Quarter of 2017 and determine if the profile of the personnel is adjusted to their
\nwork performance in the Credit Management of the Women in Action Association (AMA).
\n
\nThe results of the investigation have determined that the collaborators of the Credit
\nManagement in their majority are adjusted to the profiles of the position and present a work
\nperformance between regular and good.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.285 · 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