MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161054736 · doi:10.5430/ijba.v3n1p21

Research on Innovation Risk Management based on Bayesian Risk Decision-Making

2012· article· en· W2161054736 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yingchun Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Administration · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProsperityProduct innovationInnovation managementRisk managementProduct (mathematics)BusinessRisk analysis (engineering)New product developmentKnowledge managementManagement scienceIndustrial organizationComputer scienceMarketingEconomicsFinanceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Innovation is an inexhaustible force for the prosperity of one nation, and also the life source of enterprises. However, the high-risk characteristics of innovation activities make enterprises to perform scientific and effective innovation risk management. Based on a general introduction of Bayestian Risk Decision-making Theory and practices of product innovation in enterprises, the author discusses how to use the theory to achieve quantitative innovation-risk management, providing references for scientific decision of innovation activities in enterprises.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business AdministrationSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207