MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Synergy for Sustainability in the Upcoming Telecommunications Revolution

2018· book-chapter· en· W2903864141 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abdul Rafay, Arsala Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenueBusinessLicenseTelecommunicationsSustainabilityOperating expenseQuarter (Canadian coin)The InternetInvestment (military)FinanceEngineeringGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter examines the merger of two cellular companies (MOBILINK and WARID) for sustainability in the telecommunication sector of Pakistan. During 2011-2013, WARID faced the news of the possible sales of the company due to falling revenues, constant poor network quality, and lower network coverage in rural areas. In 2014, all telecom players participated in the auction for 3G/4G licenses, but WARID did not participate due to its technology neutral license (TNL). Important decisions were taken in 2014 like launching of 4G/LTE services in major cities, US$500 million investment, increase of tower sites, opening of new regional sales offices. These decisions along with presence of TNL made WARID an attractive target for merger with MOBILINK. In 2016, the formal merger was finalized for benefits like synergies in CAPEX/OPEX, fastest 4G network, network reach to rural areas, roll-out of new services like the internet of things (IoT) and mobile banking. The merger proved successful. During the first quarter of 2017, the company generated PKR 38.7 billion in revenues, up from the same period a year before.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.006

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in educational technologies and instructional design book seriesSame topicICT Impact and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207