{"id":"W2145483734","doi":"10.1007/s10203-011-0110-6","title":"Allocation of public funds to R&D: a portfolio choice-styled decision model and a biotechnology case study","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Decisions in Economics and Finance","topic":"Economic and Environmental Valuation","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Planner; Resource allocation; Portfolio; Status quo; Portfolio allocation; Economics; Welfare; Public welfare; Distribution (mathematics); Optimal allocation; Social planner; Variety (cybernetics); Actuarial science; Business; Microeconomics; Public economics; Computer science; Finance; Management","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008503757,0.0001707889,0.0004558287,0.000622032,0.00009110545,0.00003121236,0.0001818781,0.0001600922,0.00002309271],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001785587,0.0002093605,0.00004266424,0.0001936604,0.00009018581,0.00031528,0.0002305449,0.0001121578,0.00004255904],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001046161,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00001916116,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005826198,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001863861,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9981735,0.00001111305,0.000944272,0.0006168904,0.00001749172,0.0002366698],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989819,0.000102189,0.0003288737,0.0004990068,0.00001344233,0.00007460791],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00005263849,0.0007568491,0.6251493,0.000003185927,0.00004148987,0.00002072963,0.002672043,0.006355435,0.00001820363,0.1555783,0.00005098918,0.2093009],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0026689,0.0004719334,0.7694247,0.00002515556,0.00001488036,0.0001891819,0.001383338,0.1224666,0.00003775226,0.09502129,0.007646149,0.0006500667],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9861092,0.0004913544,0.01193129,0.0001062176,0.00009662898,0.0004219733,0.00006035245,0.000009374845,0.0007736157],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9754264,0.009201783,0.01509516,0.00007999625,0.000009363932,0.00007060074,0.000004979086,0.00002054518,0.00009117651],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.2086508,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8537473,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.1890092875416098,"score_gpt":0.2686656772403379,"score_spread":0.07965638969872807,"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."}}