MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038496780 · doi:10.1108/sd-05-2014-0065

Building strategic elements to increase contact lens sales

2014· article· en· W2038496780 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStrategic Direction · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Strategy and Innovation
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetitor analysisContact lensLens (geology)Competitive advantageOriginalityStrategic planningBusinessMarketingValue (mathematics)Through-the-lens meteringIndustrial organizationEngineeringComputer scienceSociologyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – This paper aims to build important strategic elements to penetrate deeper into the contact lens market and increase sales. Design/methodology/approach – The contact lens market is highly competitive and unattractive. Because contact lens market growth has slowed, competitors have become more alike. To survive or make more than normal profits, a contact lens manufacturer has to differentiate and compete on wider dimensions. Findings – In a complex, competitive and ever-changing vision care industry environment, a contact lens manufacturer must compete on wider dimensions to gain strategic advantage and increase sales. Practical implications – To survive, a contact lens manufacturer’s strategic game plan may not look simple and form wider strategic components. Originality/value – Provides a unique look at the contact lens market.

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 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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.500
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.219 · 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