Networks of Innovation: Science, Technology and Development in the Triple Helix Era
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a common movement, from different starting points in various countries, to achieve knowledge-based economic and social development. The heart of the triple helix thesis is an expansion of the role of knowledge in society and of the university in the economy. The university is undergoing a dual transformation: an expansion of missions to include economic and social development as well as training, cultural reproduction and research and a shift from an individual to an organisational focus in each mission. The triple helix thesis of relations among university, industry and government is proposed as a development strategy to fill social capital as well as technology gaps. European Union and Canadian networked R&D schemes and the growth of firm-formation and incubation, especially in Brazilian networked incubators, exemplify the realization of the triple helix network as a development model.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.031 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".