MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734691912 · doi:10.1145/3057273

Business-to-Consumer Platform Strategy

2017· article· en· W2734691912 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Management Information Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDigital Platforms and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertaintyChannel (broadcasting)Spillover effectCompetition (biology)ReputationQuality (philosophy)MicroeconomicsBusinessIncentiveService (business)Service qualityIndustrial organizationEconomicsMarketingComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We build an economic model to study the problem of offering a new, high-certainty channel on an existing business-to-consumer platform such as Taobao and eBay. On this new channel, the platform owner exerts effort to reduce the uncertainty of service quality. Sellers can either sell through the existing low-certainty channel or go through additional screening to sell on this new channel. We model the problem as a Bertrand competition game where sellers compete on price and exert effort to provide better service to consumers. In this game, we consider a reputation spillover effect that refers to the impact of the high-certainty channel on the perceived service quality in the low-certainty channel. Counter-intuitively, we find that low-certainty channel demand will decrease as the reputation spillover effect increases, in the case of low inter-channel competition. Also, low-certainty channel demand increases as the quality uncertainty increases, in the case of intense inter-channel competition. Furthermore, the platform owner should offer a new high-certainty channel when (i) the perceived quality for this channel is sufficiently high, (ii) sellers in this channel are able to efficiently provide quality service, (iii) consumers in this channel are not so sensitive to the quality uncertainty, or (iv) the reputation spillover effect is high. In the one-channel case, the incentives of the platform owner and sellers are aligned for all model parameters. However, this is not the case for the two-channel solution, and our model reveals where tensions will arise between parties.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0070.027
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.010

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.196 · 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