MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085046422 · doi:10.5430/ijba.v2n3p61

Knowledge Creation and Transfer: Role of Learning Organization

2011· article· en· W2085046422 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Farhad Alipour, Khairuddin Idris, Roohangiz Karimi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Administration · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Learning and Leadership
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge creationKnowledge transferKnowledge managementOrganizational learningLearning organizationComputer scienceTransfer of learningBusinessArtificial intelligenceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes how knowledge is created and transferred in organizations. It also discuses conditions required in promoting knowledge creation, the techniques used to capture knowledge in organizations, the nature of learning organizations and how it can influence knowledge creation and transfer. By utilizing previous studies, the researchers present an integrated view of how learning organization affects knowledge creation and transfer.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0120.011
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations80
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business AdministrationSame topicOrganizational Learning and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207