MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125398271 · doi:10.5539/res.v7n11p77

Increasing the Efficiency of State Institutional Aid to Small Innovative Enterprises

2015· article· en· W2125398271 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sergey Vasin, Leyla Gamidullaeva

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInnovation Policy and R&D
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsState (computer science)Process (computing)BusinessIndustrial organizationEconomic systemRegression analysisProcess managementComputer scienceEconomicsEnvironmental economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is devoted to solving the urgent problem of low efficiency of state support system for small innovative enterprises. The development of this sector is essential for the future of Russian economy. The recent economic crisis has only reinvigorated the debate. In generally our paper is concerned with studying the specific factors that influenced a SE’s behavior to be involved in innovation process. This paper elaborates a methodological approach for systematically identifying and estimating institutional factors in the system of small innovative business. The authors have developed a method of assessing the effectiveness of the state support system at the regional level, which makes it possible to evaluate the actual level of performance management in a particular region and to identify existing reserves. Correlation and regression analysis, which allows identifying the most important factors that have the greatest influence on the efficiency of the system of state support in the sector. In addition, proposed correlation and regression models are developed. Application of this method in the practice of public administration of SMEs will take into account the influence of qualitative factors in evaluating the effectiveness of the system as a whole.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicInnovation Policy and R&DFrench-language works237,207