Bibliographic record
Abstract
Various entrepreneurial factors relevant to theUnited Kingdom are examined in this Global Entrepreneurship Monitor report for2004. The report is divided into ten sections: an economic and policy overview;a summary of entrepreneurial activities in the UK, USA, France, Germany, Italy,Canada, and Japan; an overall view of UK entrepreneurship in 2004; adescription of the geography of entrepreneurship; information about thedemographic characteristics of people engaged in entrepreneurship; the types ofentrepreneurial businesses that exist in the UK; the impact of entrepreneurshipon the UK; access to finance for entrepreneurial endeavors; an examination ofthe entrepreneurial culture in the UK; and an overall summary of the reportwith policy conclusions. Total entrepreneurial activity (TEA) in the United Kingdom has remained at6.3 percentof the adult population for 2004, which is similar to thefigure in 2003. Compared to the other seven countries examined, a stability ofentrepreneurial activity in the UK exists that lacks in the other countries,indicated by a general increase in entrepreneurial activity, particularly amongwomen. Overall, the attitudes toward entrepreneurship and individual confidenceand perceptions of opportunity have shown improvement in the United Kingdom.(JSD)
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.018 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".