MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989058609 · doi:10.1108/10662240010349381

A relationship‐building model for the Web retail marketplace

2000· article· en· W1989058609 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

VenueInternet Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessMarketingCustomer baseThe InternetDigital marketingElectronic businessBusiness modelAdvertisingWorld Wide WebComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electronic commerce has existed in the business‐to‐business marketplace since the 1970s, in forms such as electronic data interchange (EDI) and electronic funds transfer (EFT). With the emergence of the Internet, and the World Wide Web in particular, electronic commerce entered a new era which opened the door for an electronic business‐to‐consumer marketplace. Although the retail side of electronic commerce is still in its infancy, the Web medium offers great potential for building the customer‐base, promoting sales, and improving after‐sales service. Examines the concept of relationship marketing, which has caused a paradigm shift in business‐to‐business marketing during recent years. Extends the concepts of network marketing to the Web retail marketplace, and develops a market process model for Web retailing that outlines the stages of the relationship building process.

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)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.203 · 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