MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1595718942

The study of influence of E-Branding on developing E-Commerce by using AHP method

2013· article· en· W1595718942 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hossein Najafi, Najmeh Morshedlou

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural, Linguistic, Economic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMargin (machine learning)Analytic hierarchy processBusinessSettlement (finance)Style (visual arts)E-commerceMarketingComputer scienceIndustrial organizationOperations researchGeographyMathematicsArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the beginning of third million, world's IT industry has been located in centre of change and development, and countries like India, Malaysia, United Arab Emirates, England and Canada have managed plans and progressed. In Iran, also, for the purpose of recognition, transfer, absorption, localization and simultaneous development with information world and reinforcement of different aspects, the use of this technology and specially E-commerce, educational and research services, general information about advantages and applications of E-commerce and lack of necessary and continuous instructions are regarded as among such important issues on settlement of E-commerce in this country. One of factors that affects on efficient E-commerce is E-branding. In this article, we want to do research about the effect of efficient factors on E-commerce with E-branding. The result of this survey can establish one of the advantages of E-commerce that is E-branding and at the moment, it is in the shape of a hypothesis, and we disclose the path for development of this technology in Iran. This research was done with using AHP method. Normal 0 false false false RU X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Обычная таблица"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCultural, Linguistic, Economic StudiesFrench-language works237,207