MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123807495

Post-Investment Migration of Canadian Venture Capital-Backed New Technology-Based Firms

2014· preprint· en· W3123807495 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cécile Carpentier, Jean‐Marc Suret

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPrivate Equity and Venture Capital
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVenture capitalBusinessMatching (statistics)Context (archaeology)Investment (military)PhenomenonIndustrial organizationSocial venture capitalEntrepreneurshipMarket economyQualitative analysisEconomic geographyCommerceQualitative researchEconomicsFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous innovative Canadian new technology-based firms migrate abroad when local venture capitalists exit. This article aims to determine how common this type of exit is, and to understand the motivations behind and the consequences of these migrations. We use a mixed-methodology approach, combining quantitative and qualitative evidence. At the market level, we find that nearly half of successful venture capital exits from Canadian firms result in migration. Using a pattern matching approach with 14 cases, we show that these migrations are motivated mainly by strategic considerations in the context of a small country with few strategic partners and a small market for innovative products. Acquired firms become truncated companies with declining activities. Only a small proportion of bought-out entrepreneurs reinvest in the local economy. This phenomenon probably has strong negative effects on the creation of new large technological firms and clusters.

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)0.006
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.253
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

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
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicPrivate Equity and Venture CapitalFrench-language works237,207