MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992642407 · doi:10.1080/00343404.2019.1695046

Are trade fairs relevant for local innovation knowledge networks? Evidence from Shanghai equipment manufacturing

2019· article· en· W2992642407 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRegional Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConferences and Exhibitions Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEast China Normal UniversityChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationUniversity of TorontoAmerican Association of Geographers
KeywordsBusinessIndustrial organizationRegional studiesMarketingEconomic geographyRegional scienceEconomicsRegional developmentSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of trade fairs in local innovation knowledge networks is studied by combining data on co-patenting networks in the Shanghai equipment manufacturing (machinery) industry with data from the Shanghai Metalworking and CNC Machine Tool Show (MWCS). Three propositions are developed, suggesting that: (1) local firms attending the MWCS are more research and development intensive than other firms; (2) trade fair attendees are linked with each other more closely in co-patenting networks than non-attendees; and (3) participating firms have more local co-patenting linkages than non-participating firms. The results largely support these propositions, confirming that participation in flagship fairs is associated with strong integration in innovation knowledge networks.

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 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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.498
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.205 · 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