| Literature DB >> 35814592 |
Abstract
In the era of knowledge economy, the competition between countries and enterprises is increasingly manifested in the competition of talents and education system. In this article, aiming at the drawbacks of the traditional HRM model of university teachers, we design and construct a management innovation model and decision-making model based on intelligent big data analysis. This article introduces DM technology. It also introduces the related knowledge of DM and the analysis and design process of HRM decision system. In this system, DM technology is used to analyze and process the existing data, predict the future situation, and provide auxiliary support for decision-making. Through simulation, the decision-making accuracy of this model can reach 95.68%, which is about 10.02% higher than other systems. It has certain practicability and reliability. This article makes a useful attempt for the application of DM technology in HRM. The research in this article is expected to play an important decision-making reference and service support for HRM of university teachers and further promote the development of HRM innovation of university teachers.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35814592 PMCID: PMC9270167 DOI: 10.1155/2022/7345547
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Figure 1University teachers' human resource management system.
Figure 2DM architecture.
Feature subset selected by quintuple cross data.
| Dataset | Feature subset |
|---|---|
| Train1 | 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 15, 21, 26, 28 |
| Train2 | 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 15, 18, 26, 28 |
| Train3 | 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 15, 26, 28 |
| Train4 | 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 15, 16, 19, 26, 28 |
| Train5 | 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 15, 26, 28 |
Figure 3Recall results of different algorithms.
Figure 4Comparison of mean square error of different algorithms.
Figure 5Comparison of F1 results of different algorithms.
Figure 6Time-consuming running of different algorithms.
Selected teacher indicators.
| Program | Knowledge level | Teaching skills | Teaching quality | Teaching effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Teacher 1 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Teacher 2 | 2 | 3.5 | 5 | 2 |
| Teacher 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Teacher 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| Teacher 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 |
| Teacher 6 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Teacher 7 | 5 | 3.5 | 2 | 2 |
| Teacher 8 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 2 |
| Teacher 9 | 5 | 2.5 | 4 | 3 |
| Teacher 10 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 4 |
Figure 7Decision accuracy results of different models.