MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224984762 · doi:10.3390/jrfm15050202

Risk Management of Startups of Innovative Products

2022· article· en· W4224984762 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Талят Бєлялов

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBusiness and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPromotion (chess)BusinessProcess managementProcess (computing)CLARITYNew product developmentProduct (mathematics)Industrial organizationMarketingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The activation of the startup movement is one of the fundamental preconditions for the transition from innovation to a startup ecosystem, the development of which is impossible without special innovation structures that help startups promote innovative products on the market. The purpose of this article is to modernize the process of promoting innovative products on the market in the form of startups, taking into account the trends of the innovative development of the modern economy. The following methods are used in the article: situational and design approaches; methods of simulation and structural−functional modeling—to determine the potential market demand for innovative products and plan the process of their promotion to the market; and BPMN notation—to formalize the integration links between actors in the process of promoting innovative products on the market. As a result, a scheme for assessing the economic efficiency of innovative product market promotion process management was developed that sorts out several indicators at each stage of the innovation process, which allows one to increase the clarity and completeness of the promotion process management while reducing costs. The system of risk management of innovative products has been studied using the example of the promotion of the innovative startup Hideez Technology Ltd on the market in Europe and the USA. This has allowed the company to benefit economically from implementing the results, reaching USD 20,000. In conclusion, the sequence of actions for making management decisions during the implementation of the strategy for innovative product promotion process management was defined.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicBusiness and Economic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207