{"id":"W2138848243","doi":"10.1109/hicss.2004.1265605","title":"An empirical assessment of transaction risks of IT outsourcing arrangements: an event study","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Outsourcing and Supply Chain Management","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":19,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"McGill University; Georgia State University","keywords":"Outsourcing; Transaction cost; Business; Asset specificity; Event study; Knowledge process outsourcing; Database transaction; Empirical research; Industrial organization; Asset (computer security); Resource-based view; Risk management; Actuarial science; Finance; Marketing; Computer science; Computer security; Competitive advantage","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005304599,0.0003730185,0.0003290485,0.001501294,0.0005823256,0.00124858,0.0004857072,0.0008921059,0.002061602],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03060455,0.000231208,0.0004386057,0.001138836,0.0007722456,0.001758971,0.001150433,0.000996395,0.0003059095],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0004780737,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000297605,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0006867589,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0006021305,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9959639,0.002736363,0.0003113145,0.0002051004,0.0005794339,0.0002038899],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9170324,0.04986191,0.02496684,0.003368773,0.002650748,0.002119255],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.001216199,0.003283436,0.9643823,0.00009269438,0.0001605614,0.0007340891,0.003856306,0.001786884,0.003056503,0.002233675,0.0003369377,0.01886046],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001933862,0.007154889,0.9422989,0.00006387426,0.0001299065,0.001047982,0.009631928,0.02949315,0.005830199,0.002347528,0.00167947,0.0001287627],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9979474,0.00002458802,0.000937174,0.00004527434,0.000003684872,0.00009085408,0.00006232612,0.000003924568,0.0008847673],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9987357,0.00004310075,0.0007728158,0.000038374,0.00001854126,0.00009282882,0.00009290959,0.000001721868,0.0002041139],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.005304599,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.02805376,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.07427762282130802,"score_gpt":0.382940989080799,"score_spread":0.308663366259491,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}