MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547720744 · doi:10.3963/jmpm.v4i2.206

Exploratory study of success factors for research and development projects run by SMEs in Quebec linked to secondary and tertiary aluminum production

2016· article· en· W2547720744 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Modern Project Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBauxite Residue and Utilization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStakeholderContext (archaeology)Exploratory researchProduction (economics)BusinessProject managementSubject (documents)Operations managementProcess managementEngineeringPolitical sciencePublic relationsComputer scienceSociologyEconomicsLibrary scienceGeographySocial scienceSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite extensive literature on the subject of success, there is no consensus. However, it is accepted that success is evaluated by certain criteria and that it is dependent on success factors. Moreover, these concepts can vary according to the type of company, project and especially the stakeholder evaluating them. Within this context, the present study will discuss these criteria and factors as applied to projects run by SMEs working in the secondary and tertiary aluminum industry. The aim of the study is to help create a generic model applicable within the specific field of R&D projects submitted to the Centre quebecois de recherche et de developpement de l’aluminium (Aluminum Research & Development Center of Quebec) .

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.246 · 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