MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W301795204

From Disruptive Technology to Disruptive Strategy: Europlasma a Case Study of Sustain Entrepreneurship

2011· article· en· W301795204 on OpenAlexaff
Cécile Fonrouge, Stéphanie Petzold

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploitEntrepreneurshipDisruptive innovationValue (mathematics)BusinessEconomicsMarketingIndustrial organizationComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sustainable entrepreneurship is underpinned by the action of entrepreneurs attempting to detect exploit environmentally-orientated social market opportunities capable of generating value creation through future innovations. In greening industries, these newcomers are like Davids trying to propose disruptive strategy and find some room for themselves alongside existing Goliaths and injecting a bit of green into their strategy. The question is what kinds of emergence models they might wish to adopt. The present texts responds with two complementary analyses - one formulated in terms of “dominant design”; and another that applies an “evolutionist” vision where small and large companies learn from one another. Comparing several propositions in a framework shaped by a case study of the firm Europlasma - an SME operating in the waste treatment sector - it highlights the role played by contingent variables and suggests partial conclusions rooted in the emergence modalities available to eco-industry start-up

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207