MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107823784 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v13n12p51

Effects of Innovation Education and Corporate Needs -Analysis Using Bayesian Network

2020· article· en· W3107823784 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueInternational Business Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicKnowledge Management and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityInnovatorBayesian networkOddsSkepticismSet (abstract data type)Analytical skillPsychologyKnowledge managementComputer scienceMathematics educationArtificial intelligenceSocial psychologyMachine learningIntellectual property

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper offers a clarification of the skills required for innovation talent by comparing the effect of innovation in education at Tokushima University and the talent requirement of companies. The researchers performed the questionnaire investigation with the use of the 19 items of The Innovator’s DNA Skill Assessment. Both the basic statistical analysis and Bayesian Network analysis were conducted based on the resulting data. The sensitivity analysis was performed after building the Bayesian Network Model. The evidences are set to “skeptical thinking”, “taking risks”, and “creativity” in the item of mind. The calculation of the odds ratio reveals that enhancing the Observation skill and Skill to Plan and Design is effective in improving skeptical thinking and creativity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.021
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.221
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.232 · 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