MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145203348 · doi:10.5430/bmr.v1n1p62

Assessing the Performance of Business Incubators: Recent France Evidence

2012· article· en· W2145203348 on OpenAlex
Zouhaı̈er M'Chirgui

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness and Management Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsGraduation (instrument)IncubatorBusinessVenture capitalEntrepreneurshipJuryMarketingFinancePolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on original data collected from a recently implemented national program on incubators, this paper provides a first attempt to assess the performance of business incubators in France following their launch in 1999 and covering the period 2000-2009. The paper runs with the general believe that the jury is still out in terms of the overall effectiveness of these venture investments (Mian, 2011). The findings indicate that ten years after their creation, business incubators in France generally evolve without much difficulty and are well embedded in the regional innovation system. The findings also reveal that business incubators continue to create innovative entrepreneurial firms, however, they may need to further increase the professionalism of their activities that exhibit some limits regarding selection, business support, networking and graduation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.247 · 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