MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214604107 · doi:10.1177/09728201211060679

ABC Smart Coffee Maker: A Young Techno Start-Up

2022· article· en· W4214604107 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nittaya Wongtada

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal of Management Cases · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Supply Chain Traceability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessOrder (exchange)Product (mathematics)MarketingVendorOutsourcingCoffee shopGraduation (instrument)CommercializationChinaOperations managementEconomicsEngineeringFinanceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A team of three young entrepreneurs formed the Auroma Brewing Company (ABC) in November 2014 right after their graduation from the University of British Columbia, Canada. Their first product was a smart coffee maker which could brew coffee with high precision, allowing users to experiment with variations in the brew. After successfully raising funds online in January 2016, they moved to Shenzhen, China, to manufacture the device. The initially promised shipment date was August 2017, but—as of October 2017—the backer and pre-order buyers were still waiting for their smart coffee maker. The team had faced several obstacles in outsourcing parts to various manufacturers, which caused several delays in shipping the device to the backers who had supported their project through the crowdfunding platforms. After the first delay, about one-tenth of the backers withdrew their supports. After successive delays, the remaining backers became more agitated and questioned the team’s ability to deliver the smart coffee device successfully. Detecting the market potential of ABC’s device, a large company had proposed to acquire ABC’s technology. The team wondered whether they should accept the offer or if they should explore other opportunities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal of Management CasesSame topicFood Supply Chain TraceabilityFrench-language works237,207