MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976451476 · doi:10.1093/cje/bei044

The evolution and performance of biotechnology regional systems of innovation

2005· article· en· W1976451476 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge Journal of Economics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVenture capitalUrban agglomerationIndustrial organizationTechnology transferBusinessProcess (computing)Intellectual propertyBiotechnologyEconomicsMarketingEconomic geographyInternational tradeFinanceBiologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper maintains that biotechnology regions develop as complex systems: they start with star scientists in research universities, generating knowledge spillovers, then move progressively towards regional technology markets. In the process they attract venture capital (or modify the behaviour of existing venture capital firms with the addition of biotechnology portfolios). The routines of universities are also modified with the addition of intellectual property and technology transfer offices intervening as sellers in the newly created knowledge markets. The paper also considers whether companies located in regional agglomerations grow faster than isolated ones, and whether companies spun-off from universities have a better performance than start-ups. The study is based on about 90 Canadian-based publicly quoted biotechnology companies.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.175 · 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