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 argues that the current paradigm of value creation has led to a number of unacceptable outcomes. Exaggerated by executive compensation incentives focused on short‐term results, the model of shareholder wealth maximization spurs short‐term profits that fail to take into account those costs that are externalized to other stakeholders. We argue that the all‐inclusive costs can far exceed those explicitly accounted for and that their magnitude is often such that it outweighs the short‐term gains by a wide margin. The cascading nature of these costs, the growing voice of other stakeholders in support of their interests, the erosion of public trust, and the increasingly dire state of the global environment have accelerated the pace of calls for the adoption of a model of sustainable value creation—one in which shareholders’ wealth is maximized without making any of the other stakeholders significantly worse off. Taking an exploratory step toward developing such an ideal process, we present a simple example of a valuation model that incorporates such a principle. We also argue that markets, education, and regulation represent the three indispensable cornerstones of a sustainable value creation framework.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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