MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1545384563

An empirically justified theory of successful indigenous entrepreneurship : a case study of the Osoyoos Indian Band

2006· article· en· W1545384563 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bob Kayseas, Kevin Hindle, Robert B. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueDeakin Research Online (Deakin University) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsFirst Nations University of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousEntrepreneurshipPerspective (graphical)Set (abstract data type)SociologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceLawArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

\n\t\t\t\t\tThe Osoyoos Indian Band case study signals the beginning of a PhD research project that will take approximately three years to complete. Taken in isolation, the objectives for the Osoyoos case study are modest. We want to refine our theoretical model and improve the case study protocol before embarking on a set of 5 case studies to explore Indigenous entrepreneurship; what it is, what communities do to succeed and a generalized definition of a successful venture from an Indigenous Canadian perspective.<br />\n\t\t\t\t

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDeakin Research Online (Deakin University)Same topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207