MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996627361 · doi:10.3390/jrfm12040188

Influence of Venture Capital and Knowledge Transfer on Innovation Performance in the Big Data Environment

2019· article· en· W2996627361 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chuanrong Wu, Veronika Lee, Mark E. McMurtrey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPrivate Equity and Venture Capital
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsVenture capitalProspectusBusinessPortfolioKnowledge transferSocial venture capitalIndustrial organizationProfit (economics)EntrepreneurshipInvestment (military)MarketingFinanceEconomicsMicroeconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technological innovation requires large investments. Venture capital (VC) is a prominent financial source for innovative start-ups. A venture capitalist will inevitably transfer knowledge to facilitate the innovation of a firm while monitoring and advising its portfolio companies. Only when a firm has its own valuable new knowledge and high growth potential would venture capitalists select it. At the same time, big data knowledge, such as customer demands and user preferences, is also important for the new product development of a firm in the big data environment. Therefore, private knowledge transferred from venture capitalists, new knowledge developed independently by a firm itself, and big data knowledge are the three main types of knowledge for venture-backed firms in the big data environment. To find the influences of VC and knowledge transfer on the innovative performance of venture-backed firms, a model of maximizing the present value of the expected profit of new product innovation performance of a venture-backed firm in the big data environment is presented. The model can help venture capitalists to determine the scale of investment and the optimal exit time and predict the internal rate of return (IRR). This model can also help innovative start-ups to illustrate the value and prospects of a project to attract investment in their business prospectus.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.618
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicPrivate Equity and Venture CapitalFrench-language works237,207