MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Fallacy of the Idea of Military Entrepreneurship

2021· book-chapter· en· W3127267971 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony Chukwu

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in business strategy and competitive advantage book series · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicHuman Resource and Talent Management
Canadian institutionsSeneca Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFallacyMainstreamEntrepreneurshipFace (sociological concept)NarrativePublic relationsSociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyEpistemologySocial scienceLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this chapter, the author argues that the mainstream Occam's razor narrative of military entrepreneurship as a successful income earning second career for veterans only rings true in intellectual circles. This is based on a presupposed reality that veterans lack challenges building a second career. He uses existing literature to show that contrary to the mainstream narrative, military entrepreneurship is not a smooth-sailing path to a veteran's second career. Entrepreneurs face the same challenges irrespective of whether they are veterans or civilians. Military training might equip someone with discipline, focus, tenacity, and calculated risk avowal approach or risk taking that a civilian may not have, yet it may not ensure entrepreneurial success. A veteran's military background and training, if anything, may be rather inhibiting than facilitating of entrepreneurship. It's a fallacy to stipulate otherwise.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.012
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in business strategy and competitive advantage book seriesSame topicHuman Resource and Talent ManagementFrench-language works237,207