MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214414862 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v14n12p111

Business Efficiency Evaluation of Machine Tool Manufacturers by Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA): A Case Study of Taiwanese Listed Machine Tool Companies

2021· article· en· W3214414862 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jui-Lung Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData envelopment analysisBenchmarkingProductivityMalmquist indexEfficient frontierBusinessIndustrial organizationProduction–possibility frontierScale (ratio)Total factor productivityProduction (economics)Computer scienceOperations managementMarketingEconomicsPortfolioStatisticsFinanceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is widely used to measure the business efficiency of many industries, among which the Taiwanese machine tool industry is well-known for its complete supply-chain system. Relying on DEA and Malmquist Productivity Index to analyze the business efficiency of Taiwanese listed machine tool manufacturers from 2018 to 2019, this study compared the changes in their business efficiencies and productivities. According to the five change indicators of Malmquist, only the technical efficiency, pure technical efficiency, and scale efficiency of the overall industry posted some growth during the research period, showing that the whole industry is actively improving its technical efficiency and striving to achieve the scale efficiency. However, technical change and total factor productivity declined slightly, indicating that the industry still makes more technical progress. Thus, companies should adjust their inputs and outputs to improve the production boundary for technical progress. The purposes of this study are to identify the success factors of the excellent performance of manufacturers and the benchmarking indicators of the decision-making unit on the efficient frontier results to provide some references for formulating future business strategies and direction.

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 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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.018
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.254
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicEfficiency Analysis Using DEAFrench-language works237,207