MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048219546 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v2n1p23

An Empirical Study on the Adoption of RFID Technology for Logistics Service Providers in China

2009· article· en· W2048219546 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chieh Yu Lin, Yi Hui Ho

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOutsourcing and Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessChinaMarketingService (business)Service providerSupply chainQuality (philosophy)Survey data collectionService quality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to study the influences of technological, organizational and environmental factors on the adoption of RFID technology for logistics service providers in China. While the growth of China’s economy hinges to a large extent on the ability of the logistics industry to operate more efficiently and effectively in the global supply chain system, China’s logistics companies should pay attention to adopt more efficient logistics technologies to provide better services for their customers. The data to study the factors affecting the adoption of RFID technology came from a questionnaire survey of logistics service providers in China, and 574 logistics companies were analyzed. According to the survey results, about fifty percents of logistics companies are interested in RFID technology, but less than ten percents have the experiences of using RFID technology. Explicitness and accumulation of technology, organizational encouragement for innovation, quality of human resources, and governmental support exhibit significant influences on the willingness to adopt RFID technology.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations37
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicOutsourcing and Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207