MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791513806 · doi:10.5430/jbar.v7n1p22

A Review on Art of Creating Values in Retail for Improving Business Performance

2018· review· en· W2791513806 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sunil Atulkar, Bikrant Kesari

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Business Administration Research · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Retail Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessEntertainmentRetail industryMarketingThe artsBusiness environmentProcess (computing)Key (lock)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today the retail business environment becomes more complex and unpredictable in nature. In this research article researchers try to discus on engagement of arts in creating values in retail sector organisations. As the art based methods are used in various organisational developments, so this paper focused on four processes proposed by Darso and Dawids (2002) in retail sector organisation, to identify how these methods innovatively works on retail customers and why these process are important for the retail organisation performance. We identifies that the retailers should have to focus on the use of arts based method such as decoration, entertainment, developing the high skilled employees and attractive retail environment, enables customer to see the retail store environment more differently which helps in improving the performance of retail sector organisations. Based on the review of earlier published literatures, the present study shows that the uses of arts in creating shopping values more innovative, effectively and efficiently in retail sector organisations, have become a key to develop the effective business strategy to get competitive advantages over others.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.258
GPT teacher head0.438
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Business Administration ResearchSame topicConsumer Retail Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207