MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896692527 · doi:10.1109/tem.2018.2869183

Guest Editorial Resource, Routine, Reputation, or Regulation Shortages: Can Data- and Analytics-Driven Capabilities Inform Tech Entrepreneur Decisions

2018· editorial· en· W2896692527 on OpenAlexaff
Moren Lévesque, Nitin Joglekar

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · 2018
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommitIngenuityBusinessNew VenturesReputationAnalyticsEconomic shortageResource (disambiguation)Knowledge managementEntrepreneurshipMarketingComputer scienceEconomicsData scienceGovernment (linguistics)Finance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The five papers in this special section explore the use of data analytics in current business and management decision making. Entrepreneurial ingenuity plays a crucial role in building new business enterprises, especially when resources are lacking, routines are nonexistent, a firm’s reputation is not established, and/or regulations are inadequate. Resources in the form of human capital are often the foundation of independent startups or new corporate business ventures. Routines in the form of organizational and technical processes are often key in building these new ventures. Reputation in terms of an entrepreneur’s accomplishments or network is essential for acquiring needed resources and developing fundamental routines to initiate, commit to, organize, and grow the startup. Examines the impacts of such shortages create threats or opportunities for independent startups and new business ventures spun off from established firms.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0100.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.008

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.232
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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Engineering ManagementSame topicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital FinanceFrench-language works237,207