MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121564179 · doi:10.1109/iemce.2008.4617954

New product evaluation in telecommunications

2008· article· en· W2121564179 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicProduct Development and Customization
Canadian institutionsBell (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)Computer scienceTelecommunicationsProduct (mathematics)Competition (biology)Telecommunications serviceEconomic indicatorRisk analysis (engineering)Selection (genetic algorithm)BusinessComputer securityEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intense competition has forced the telecommunications industry to continuously develop and deliver new products to market. The key factor in selecting successful products is a comprehensive upfront evaluation of the productpsilas economic viability. This paper introduces a structured methodology to evaluating telecommunication NPIs. The methodology introduces key decision criteria for evaluating the new productpsilas viability based on economic indicators and non-economic selection criteria focused on the business ecosystem within which the new product is being offered. Additionally, sensitivity analysis of input variables is introduced to facilitate evaluation of critical variables and mitigating the associated risks. Though this paper is targeted at the evaluation and analysis of Telecommunication NPIs, the evaluation framework can be applied to any high technology industry.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.497
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicProduct Development and CustomizationFrench-language works237,207