Global performance measures for transnational construction corporations
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
The top transnational construction corporations (TCCs) are ranked according to their international revenues by the Engineering News Record. The amount or share of international revenues of a contractor however does not necessarily reflect the contractor's global performance. The geographic spread of works in different countries and regions of the world and the extent of liberalization or protection of markets do influence the global performance of TCCs. To account for these factors, new measures of global spread, global intensity and global intensity with domestic performance are proposed which measures the global performance of contractors. These measures of global performance were applied to the top 20 international contractors reported by the ENR. The ranking of the top 20 TCCs shifts when the new measures of global performance are applied to these companies. One salient finding is that not all TCCs belonging to the top five, in terms of international revenues, are truly global construction corporations based on new global performance indicators. A significant implication for future research work is to assess how managers of TCCs can transform global presence and performance, as reflected in these new measures, into global competitive advantages.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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