Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the 1960s and 1970s the Suzuki Motor Company (SMC) starts with the internationalization of motorbike production. However, it isn’t until the 1980s that the company develops a strong internationalization of automobile production. The company’s first automobile assembly site opens in 1976 in Indonesia. In 1981, SMC signs its first business tie-ups with the General Motors Corporation (GM). In 1982, SMC starts an assembly operation in Pakistan and in the same year a JV agreement is signed with Maruti Udyog Limited (MUL) for the set-up of an integrated production site in India. SMC internationalization efforts in the 1980s also include a JV with Santana Motors in Spain (1985), an agreement with General Motors Corporation of Canada to establish a production JV – better know as CAMI (1986) – and the establishment of assembly sites in New Zealand (1984), Columbia (1987) and Egypt (1989). In the 1990s this pattern of internationalization continues. In Asia SMC establishes wholly owned operations, ties ups and JVs for the production of passenger cars in Korea, China, Vietnam and Myanmar. In Europe, SMC builds an integrated production plant in Hungary (Suzuki, 2004). In addition, SMC enters into a number of collaborations and strategic alliances, the most important of which with General Motors in 1998. The strong international expansion in the 1980s and 1990s is followed by a phase of consolidation and strategic reorientation in the 2000s. Maruti–Suzuki India (MSI), for example, is no longer mandated to mainly serve the domestic market, but receives the mandate to produce for the European market ( The Financial Express , 2002). In the 2000s, SMC is in the process of reorganizing its international division of labour. SMC envisions MSI to develop into a global R&D and production hub for small cars. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.003 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".