MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011096389 · doi:10.1787/6856ab8c-en

Patterns of innovation, advanced technology use and business practices in Canadian firms

2020· paratext· en· W3011096389 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fernando Galindo‐Rueda, Fabien Verger, Sylvain Ouellet

Bibliographic record

VenueOECD science, technology and industry working papers · 2020
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrodata (statistics)BusinessKnowledge managementWork (physics)Information and Communications TechnologyMarketingComputer scienceEngineeringWorld Wide WebPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper uses a distributed microdata analysis approach to map patterns of technology adoption in Canadian firms, exploring the relationship between technology adoption, business practices and innovation. Prepared by the OECD NESTI secretariat in collaboration with Statistics Canada, the paper leverages a unique enterprise database combining information on innovation, technology adoption and the use of selected business practices. This work suggests a number of possible pathways for selecting and defining priority technology and business practices for data collection and reporting, implementing recommendations in the 2018 Oslo Manual on enablers and objectives of business innovation, and identifying potential synergies between business innovation, management and ICT, and other surveys focused on various aspects of technology adoption.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.019
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOECD science, technology and industry working papersSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207