Does venture capital spur innovation or the other way around? Evidence on the significance of investment timing from China
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper explores the interaction between venture capital and innovation in China. We focus on the difference between early, development, and expansion stages of innovation firms when they receive their first installment of venture capital. Using ordinary least squares (OLS), switching regression model and counterfactual comparison, we find that selection effect exists in all three stages, suggesting that established innovation capacity increases the possibility of innovation firms to receive venture capital. Further, the selection effect is most profound in the development stage. The treatment effect, the combined effect of financial role and value‐added service, plays an important role in promoting innovation in all three stages. However, the mechanisms of the effect vary greatly across the early, development, and expansion stages. The financial role of venture capital does not influence innovation in the early stage, but promotes innovation in the development stage, and restrains innovation in the expansion stage. Value‐added service promotes innovation in the early and expansion stages, and whether it influences innovation in the development stage needs further study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it