MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059490012 · doi:10.1504/ijeim.2007.012887

Entrepreneurship, knowledge and learning in cluster formation and evolution: the Windsor Ontario tool, die and mould cluster

2007· article· en· W2059490012 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tod Rutherford, John Holmes

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWindsorCluster (spacecraft)Tacit knowledgeEntrepreneurshipEconomic geographyAutomotive industryBusinessIndustrial organizationKnowledge managementEconomicsComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we examine the role of entrepreneurs in the development of the Windsor, Ontario automotive Tool, Die and Mould (TDM) cluster. We assess Feldman et al.'s stage model of entrepreneurial-led cluster formation and their contention that entrepreneurs may be the active creators of institutions of cluster development. We concur with their basic thesis but argue that Feldman et al. do not address the role of tacit and codified knowledge in cluster development and the challenges posed by power asymmetries arising from the development of larger firms within the cluster and its integration into TNC 'knowledge pipelines'. A significant aspect of the current crisis in the Windsor TDM cluster is how tacit and codified knowledge is being recombined in ways favouring larger firms within the cluster. Larger firms have developed stronger associational relationships to protect their intellectual property, threatening to reduce tacit knowledge flows within the cluster.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.237 · 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.

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

Citations20
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation ManagementSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207