MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2570282650 · doi:10.5430/ijba.v8n1p65

Fractality in Manufacturing Industry

2016· article· en· W2570282650 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Miguel Montano-Alvarez, Marcos Salazar-Medina, Tomás Morales Acoltzi, Leydi Z. Guzman-Aguilar, Angel Machorro-Rodriguez, Edna Araceli Romero-Flores

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Administration · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBusiness, Innovation, and Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTecnológico Nacional de MéxicoDepartment of Environment and Primary Industries
KeywordsMandelbrot setBoomFractalStock exchangePoint (geometry)EconometricsQuarter (Canadian coin)Variable (mathematics)MathematicsEconomicsComputer scienceFinanceGeographyEngineeringMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fractal theory, a topic first introduced by Mandelbrot in 1970, has nevertheless witnessed a great boom in the field of science in this last decade. In this article, we analyze time series (TS), behavior of the variable, cost of that sold (CS), and we assume and demonstrate that there is fractality in the system for manufacturing companies in Mexico. We analyzed 30 companies that are listed on the Mexican stock exchange, obtaining 23 data for each organization, taking a period stretching from the first quarter of 2010 to the third quarter of 2015, and obtaining a total of 704 data. We only selected 512 for each one of the 30 TS, using fractal interpolation (FI) as the method for generating data in TS. TS 30 was characterized from the point of view of Visual Recurrence Analysis (VRA) software. It is apparent that in 80% of the companies analyzed, the dynamics of the CS system were elucidated using 4 variables.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business AdministrationSame topicBusiness, Innovation, and EconomyFrench-language works237,207