IPMS Implementation Efficiency Study Based on Chinese IPMS Standard GB/T 29490
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
Intellectual property management system (IPMS) standard GB/T 29490-2013 which aims at creating a culture of intellectual property management and improving intellectual management level for enterprises was published by Chinese government in 2013. The main objective of this research is constructing a method to calculate the relative efficiency of IPMS implementation according to the audit result of IPMS standard in order to help manager and IPMS training & consultant body to improve the system to be more efficient and more compliant to IPMS standard. Two evaluation models have been developed so as to achieve the valuation of inputs and outputs which are used in calculating the relative efficiency of IPMS implementation efficiency using Data envelop analysis. The case study indicates the method developed in the research can be effectively applied in benchmarking to find out the deficiency of IPMS practices and enhance the IP management level of efficient companies and to help certification body to figure out the limitation of the audit and improve the audit skill.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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