MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023625566 · doi:10.7202/1003450ar

Comprendre le rôle de l’intermédiation dans la coopétition : le cas des industries aéronautiques et spatiales

2011· article· fr· W2023625566 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David Salvetat, Mickaël Géraudel

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement international · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Strategy and Innovation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comment créer ou favoriser la coopération entre entreprises concurrentes compte tenu des risques d’opportunisme inhérents à la coopétition ? Le rôle de l’acteur intermédiaire occupe une place prépondérante dans la réponse à cette question. Peu de recherches s’intéressent à celui-ci sous l’angle des relations coopétitives. Le but de cette recherche est donc de comprendre les mécanismes sous-jacents existants entre les acteurs intermédiaires et les entreprises impliquées dans une relation de coopétition. 58 entretiens semi-directifs ont été menés dans les organisations du secteur aéronautique et spatial.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement internationalSame topicBusiness Strategy and InnovationFrench-language works237,207