MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626188620

The Development of Competitive Advantages of Brand in ihe Automotive Industry (Case Study: Pars Khodro Co)

2017· article· en· W2626188620 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Akbar Forghani Bonab

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Trade and Competitiveness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive industryCompetitive advantageDelphi methodDelphiComputer scienceField (mathematics)MarketingCompetitive intelligenceIndustrial organizationBusinessManufacturing engineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Achieving competitive advantage in the automobile manufacturing companies in the world to remain stable in the current atmosphere in consideration of complex and competitive environment of today's markets is considered as one of the critical issues in manufacturing companies. The main problem in this research is to identify the competitive advantages of brand and model their competitive advantage in the automotive industry. In this regard, the study of theoretical foundations of research in the field of competitive advantages of brand, components have been identified and by using Delphi techniques and structures final interviews added to Inventory and native competitive advantages of brand models in the automotive industry has been identified. Data were analyzed using SPSS and Smart PLS software. The results of data analysis totally indicated in the answer to this question could be deduced that in the final version is extracted using Smart PLS software, was observed that due to the three outcome measures 0.01, 0.25 and 0.36, as quantities of weak, medium and strong for GOF, of the 0.60 show is a fitting strong model that indicates that fitted the pattern of competitive advantage brand.

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 score0.069
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 venueThe Journal of Internet Banking and CommerceSame topicGlobal Trade and CompetitivenessFrench-language works237,207