MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W41580422 · doi:10.22215/timreview/523

Social Entrepreneurship: Definition and Boundaries

2012· article· en· W41580422 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Samer Abu-Saifan

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology Innovation Management Review · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntrepreneurshipUnemploymentEconomicsEconomic systemEconomic geographyClassical economicsNeoclassical economicsPositive economicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IntroductionMost economists and academics support the notion that entrepreneurship is becoming a crucial factor in the development and well-being of societies. Whether the entrepreneurial activities are practiced in factor-driven, efficiency-driven, or innovation-driven economies (Porter et al., 2002), the ultimate results continue to exhibit: i) lower unemployment rates; ii)

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.021
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations397
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology Innovation Management ReviewSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207