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
First, we develop a macro level explanation for how changes in social capital occur. Second, we apply a dynamic approach to social capital by examining on a more micro level the activities which are involved with and contribute to the increase or decrease in social capital in, largely dyadic, relationships within entrepreneurial networks.Third, we propose a more robust notion of social capital.We found that five key relationship-driving forces were involved in developing social capital.The research findings suggested that entrepreneurs seem to have a strikingly similar modus operandi when it comes to creating and destroying their network social capital. Activities such as the reciprocal trading of favours, socializing, joint problem-solving, delivering to expectation and using transparent communications were crucial to both. Finally, we discovered that entrepreneurs managed their network relationships heuristically relying on social capital, particularly by leveraging the productive ambiguity of this crucial [net]work asset.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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