MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616487297 · doi:10.5430/jms.v8n2p43

Study of Strategies for Technological Factors to Be Involved in Income Distribution

2017· article· en· W2616487297 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Liqun Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Strategy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNorthwest University for NationalitiesNorthwest University
KeywordsEnthusiasmCreativityIncentiveDistribution (mathematics)Income distributionBusinessTechnological changeProductive forcesIndustrial organizationMarketingEconomic systemEconomicsMarket economyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With comprehensive development of the knowledge economy and the information economy, scientific and technological progresses have become the determinant factor of social and economic development. Many countries are making an all-out effort in developing technology industry and enterprises, fully arouse the enthusiasm and creativity of technology owners and make them the backbone force for the national economy and social development. Being the main driving force for the implementation of scientific and technological achievements, scientific and technological talents are very important links which shall never be overlooked. Only by rational and correct income distribution system as well as innovative and effective incentive model can the initiatives and creativity of scientific and technological talents be truly aroused. This article analyzed the necessity of technological factors being involved in income distribution and raised feasible suggestions regarding the implementation mechanism of the said involvement.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and StrategySame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207