MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4302185722

Comparative analysis of franchising in international markets

2016· article· en· W4302185722 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kovačević Maja, Injac Marko

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFranchising Strategies and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessIndustrial organizationEconomic geographyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growing role of franchising at the global level requires its further improvement. This business model has great business potential, especially in the Serbian market, given the current underdevelopment and inaccessibility of information. At the core of our research, we outlined the characteristics of this business model, its impact on business development and at the same time we tried to draw the attention of domestic business entities to the benefits of franchising as a modern way of doing business. We start our research with a focus on the comparative analysis of Serbia, as a very poorly developed market. We then discuss the concept of franchising in Europe, with a special focus on Poland as a country that is ready to export franchising systems, and we continue by providing comparisons with the world's largest markets, namely, the USA and Canada. In this paper, we tried to elaborate on the economic viability of this project, as well as the increasing expansion and importance franchising has been experiencing in the last few years. Emphasis is placed on the use of franchise in many areas of business where there is the possibility of implementing both business models.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicFranchising Strategies and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207