MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210413613 · doi:10.3390/jrfm15020059

From Fragility to Resilience—How Prepared Was the Romanian Business Environment to Face the COVID-19 Crisis?

2022· article· en· W4210413613 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Suzana Demyen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptimismRomanianPessimismContext (archaeology)PandemicFace (sociological concept)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)BusinessBusiness environmentResilience (materials science)Psychological resilienceCrisis managementVulnerability (computing)FragilityPublic relationsMarketingEconomic growthPolitical scienceEconomicsSociologyPsychologyGeographyBusiness administrationComputer securityMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The issue of business resilience is a topical one, in the context of which a large number of the companies on the market have faced many challenges in the last two years, raising the issue of market survival. But was the Romanian business environment ready to face the COVID-19 crisis? How prepared is it to continue to face the obstacles posed by the pandemic? The purpose of this paper is to identify the main effects that the pandemic has generated on Romanian SMEs, while presenting the results of a study on this topic. We proceeded to determine the level of familiarity of respondents on the evolution of SMEs during the pandemic and the study of their level of interest, on the effects generated by the current epidemiological context, and on the evolution of the business environment, while analysing the level of optimism/pessimism of the respondents, regarding the general evolution of the Romanian business environment. Although some companies are open to implementing change, there is also a significant percentage of firms that, for various reasons, do not consider making major changes in the near future, either because they are not aware of the need for change or out of fear.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207