A scientometric analysis of the Proceedings of the McMaster World Congress on the Management of Intellectual Capital and Innovation for the 1996‐2008 period
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
Purpose This paper seeks to present a scientometric analysis of the Proceedings of the McMaster World Congress on the Management of Intellectual Capital and Innovation for the 1996‐2008 period in order to better understand the evolution and identity of the discipline. Design/methodology/approach Qualitative and quantitative data analysis techniques were applied to determine author distribution, country, individual and institutional‐level productivity rankings, and employed methodologies. Findings It was found that an average manuscript was written by 1.73 authors. The USA, Canada and the UK were the three most productive countries, which is consistent with prior KM/IC productivity research. Most productive institutions were the University of Calgary (Canada), Polytechnic University of Catalonia (Spain) and Universidad de Oviedo (Spain). The most productive individuals were James Falconer, Jose Maria Viedma Marti and Scott Erickson. Lotka's α , which represents the degree of conference delegate retention rate, was established as 2.7. Case studies were the most frequent method of inquiry, followed by framework development and literature reviews. Surveys and usage of secondary data were the leading empirical methodologies. Interviews, laboratory experiments, and field studies were under‐represented. Research limitations/implications The findings offer valuable insights into the state and development of the KM/IC discipline and shed some light on its identity. Practical implications Scientometric analyses are of primary interest for academic researchers and therefore the practical implications of this study are limited. Originality/value The research reported is among the first to investigate the issue of the KM/IC discipline identity from a descriptive perspective.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | high |
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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