MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531883313

Technology and Strategic Management Decision-Making as a Constrained Shortest Path Problem

2008· dissertation· en· W2531883313 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Steven D. Formaneck

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsShortest path problemPath (computing)Mathematical optimizationOperations researchComputer scienceManagement scienceBusinessEngineeringMathematicsTheoretical computer scienceComputer network
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A constrained shortest path algorithm is developed and implemented in Matlab to optimize the management decision-making process, which is a potential tool for managers. An empirical analysis is performed using Statistics Canada’s Workplace and Employee Survey (WES), which consists of variables relating to employers and their employees, conducted from years 1999 through 2004, inclusively. Specifically, the research explores the relationships among variables such as innovation, technology use, training and human resource management and its effect on the success of the firm in terms of profit and labor productivity. The results are compared to the current literature in technology and organizational management. In general, it is discovered that optimal management strategies are highly dependent upon the performance in which the firm operates. Additionally, the constrained shortest path algorithm developed for the thesis is tested against other leading methods in the literature and is found to be quite competitive. The tests are run on randomly generated constrained shortest path problems of varying degrees of complexity with the algorithm performing well on all levels.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207