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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A firm's competitive behavior is an important topic for practitioners, theorists, and policy makers. Among the explanations of firms' behavior is Michael Porter's model. We have presented this model along with some alternative approaches: Structure-Conduct-Performance, the New Industrial Organization and Game Theory, the Resource-Based Perspective, and Market Process Economics. These approaches are discussed in terms of their relations, similarities, and differences relative to Porter's model. In our comparative discussion, we support the use of Porter's model to evaluate firms' competitive behavior. Our reasons for this support are this model's popularity, well-defined structure, feasibility, clarity, simplicity, generality, and its complementarity to two other main approaches. We find the Porter model to be a convenient approach to the firm's competitive advantage and strategy.Business Economics (2008) 43, 55–64; doi:10.2145/20080305
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it