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
This paper studies the contextual factors that influence whether invention occurs during work time or leisure time. Leisure time invention, a potentially important but thus far largely unexplored source of employee creativity, refers to invention where the main underlying idea occurs while the employee is away from the workplace. We build on existing theory in the fields of organizational creativity and knowledge recombination, especially work relating context to creativity. The paper’s main theoretical contribution is to extend our understanding of the boundaries of employee creativity by adding to the discussion of how access to and exploitation of different types of resources—during work hours or during leisure time—may affect creativity. Based on survey data from more than 3,000 inventions from German employee inventors, we find that leisure time inventions are more frequently observed for conceptually based problems, in cases where interactions with people outside the organization are important for making the invention, and for smaller research and development projects. Our findings also suggest that employee inventions during work time may become more “embedded” in an environment of path-dependent resources than those made during leisure time.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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