MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963533139 · doi:10.1177/088636870003200104

Shattering the Myths about Dot.Com Employee Pay

2000· article· en· W1963533139 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCompensation & Benefits Review · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsPricewaterhouseCoopers (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMythologyBusinessThe InternetMarketingPublic relationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Internet is here to stay, and so is the dot.com employee. Nearly every major company today is struggling with how to pay this new breed of employee. Traditional corporate pay schemes no longer attract and retain the best dot.com people. Companies fail to attract and retain talented dot.com employees because they cling to out-dated myths about these workers. The most successful companies in the e-business world-both traditional companies and true Internet companies-ignore these myths and respond to the needs and interests of today's dot.com employees. This article identifies the myths and, using real-life examples, outlines what companies need to do to attract the most outstanding e-talent.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.233 · 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