MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2975365047 · doi:10.4236/ti.2019.103003

Whether Developing Country Can Achieve Remarkable Progress in the Global Market by High-Tech—Huawei Company as an Example

2019· article· en· W2975365047 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhenchuan Jiang, Xun Gong

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology and Investment · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaBusinessOrder (exchange)Value (mathematics)Developing countryHigh techInternational tradeGlobal value chainValue chainIndustrial organizationEconomicsSupply chainComparative advantageEconomic growthMarketingFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the development of international trade and the formation global value chain, global economy increases rapidly and many countries can gain benefits from it. However, the gap between the rich and the poor is becoming increasingly sharp. Developed countries dominate the global trade and achieve the majority of value chain. As a big developing country, China has developed to the second biggest economy, and the biggest export volume country, but still stays at the weak stage of the global value chain. Because in China, low-value-end manufacturing is the dominating economic sector. In order to achieve more value in global trade, China desires to update the business model from traditional industries to emerging industries by developing high-tech industries. It is widely believed that an increasing amount of Chinese companies concentrate on R&D and innovation to gain advantage in the new wave of global economy. Huawei, a remarkable Chinese high-tech company which develops from a sale agent firm to one of the most innovative companies in the whole world, will be presented in this paper to show the importance of high-tech and updating industrial structure for a company and countries.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology and InvestmentSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207