MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126525290 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14020067

Modeling Study on Risk Identification in the Process of Anti-Crisis Enterprise Management

2021· article· en· W3126525290 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Grygoriy Shamborovskyi, Yuliia Nehoda, Nataliya Demidova, Volodymyr Tarashchenko, Світлана Бреус

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Business Development Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Process (computing)Computer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Fuzzy logicRisk managementCrisis managementTask (project management)Sample (material)Process managementManagement scienceBusinessArtificial intelligenceEngineeringSystems engineeringEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study provides solutions for the scientific task related to the improvement of theoretical and development of methodological and applied principles, and the identification and evaluation of risks and threats as factors of anti-crisis management of the enterprises. Based on the developed concept of quantitative risk analysis, we constructed a fuzzy hierarchical model, which gives the possibility to get the estimates: risk factors; specific types of threats in the framework of a process; risk processes, identified in the anti-crisis management; and the integrative risk of anti-crisis management. Furthermore, the proposed model makes it possible to identify the threats that are the risks of the highest (catastrophe) layer. The fuzzy hierarchical model construction process includes the determination of linguistic variables, term-varieties, and universal sets for quantitative evaluation of figures and risks, the establishment of parameters of the membership functions for indicators and risks, the formation of fuzzy knowledge bases, the construction of a fuzzy hierarchical model in the MATLAB environment, the evaluation of adequacy of model based on the learning sample, the correction of a model, and the adoption of a resolution regarding its final variant. The use of the model in the anti-crisis enterprise management will provide the anti-crisis team with the possibility to give early warning of all negative factors, give their quantitative evaluation, and take them into account in the course of making managerial decisions.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicEconomic and Business Development StrategiesFrench-language works237,207