MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020573936 · doi:10.5367/0000000054615487

When Do Start-ups Make Sense?

2005· article· en· W2020573936 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Clement J. Langemeyer

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustry and Higher Education · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPrivate Equity and Venture Capital
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommercializationPaceEntrepreneurshipMarketingBusiness opportunityBusinessIntellectual propertyNew VenturesPublic relationsEconomic growthPolitical scienceEconomicsFinanceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The start-up has received considerable attention in the last few years. While the National Research Council of Canada has generated many start-ups over its 88-year history, the creation of a formal entrepreneurship programme in the mid-1990s dramatically accelerated the pace at which they were created. Many factors come into play in the decision to select an appropriate commercialization vehicle. While the strength and scale of the business opportunity are key factors, as are the people involved and the status of the intellectual property, there are many other internal and external factors that must be taken into consideration. This article explores these factors and discusses the risks and benefits of the start-up as a commercialization vehicle.

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 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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.510
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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.258
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustry and Higher EducationSame topicPrivate Equity and Venture CapitalFrench-language works237,207