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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As more companies pursue “open innovation” and adopt social networking and Web 2.0 tools, there is an emerging opportunity for them to connect with a diverse body of stakeholders and incorporate their interests and ideas. However, this also introduces many new challenges. The author identifies key properties that such networking mechanisms must satisfy if they are to succeed. He introduces a simple framework based on two dimensions of choices for designing such mechanisms: how the stakeholders are motivated to participate and how the company uses their inputs and makes decisions. For any choice, there are trade-offs to be considered. The author concludes by identifying the design that is most likely to succeed in fundamentally advancing the state-of-the-art of stakeholder marketing. Examples of many pioneering companies, such as Starbucks, Dell, Staples, Muji, and several others, are included in the discussion to illustrate the key propositions presented.
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 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 | 0.035 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 it