MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084207437 · doi:10.1002/adem.201200356

Spin of a Nanotech Spin‐Off

2012· article· en· W2084207437 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

VenueAdvanced Engineering Materials · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanotechnology research and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntellectual propertyEntrepreneurshipEngineering ethicsTransformational leadershipSpin offsNanotechnologySpin (aerodynamics)Focus (optics)Knowledge managementBusinessPolitical scienceEngineeringMaterials sciencePublic relationsComputer sciencePhysicsIndustrial organizationMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Innovation in advanced technology often springs from ideas birthed in universities yet the attitudes of professors and their students towards entrepreneurship and their stance on the collision between fundamental research in the pursuit of knowledge and applied research directed to the creation of intellectual property, inventions, companies, jobs, products, and wealth, is not that well appreciated either inside or outside our universities. In this article I will explore this interesting issue and try to gain some insight into the challenges faced by professors confronted by the challenge of transforming basic science and engineering knowledge into products in the market place, using nanotechnology as a case study. While the specific focus of this article is on nanotechnology, more generic issues are also raised that relate to transformational business development and entrepreneurship in society and universities in a larger sense.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.239 · 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