Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to show that new‐style retail wine stores with features such as tasting rooms, lecture theatres and demonstration kitchens used to educate and engage customers have better retail efficiency than old‐style stores. Design/methodology/approach Sales dollars, labour hours and litres of inventory depletion from a paired sample of old‐style and new‐style facilities located in five different communities are submitted to a data envelopment analysis to determine the retail efficiency of the stores. Findings All the new‐build stores had higher retail efficiency than the older stores, and input reductions in older stores were unlikely to bring their performance up to the level of the new store concepts. Originality/value One of the shortcomings of this research is that the old and new stores in the paired samples are different in size and location within each municipality. While it is clear that the new store features (tasting rooms, seminars, cooking demonstrations, etc.) increase retail efficiency, it remains to know the contribution of each of feature to the improvement in retail performance.
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".