MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309524787 · doi:10.1108/imds-03-2022-0185

Economic impacts of in-house and packaged software investments: the influence of software investment opportunities

2022· article· en· W4309524787 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial Management & Data Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDigital Platforms and Economics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftwareBusinessInvestment (military)Software developmentValue (mathematics)MarketingIndustrial organizationComputer scienceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Software has become increasingly important in business. However, the value of aggregate in-house and packaged software investments and the influence of an industry's software investment opportunities (SIOs) are poorly understood in the literature. This study addresses this research gap and proposes that an industry's SIOs play an essential role in the economic impacts of industry in-house and packaged software investments. Design/methodology/approach A model of the economic impacts of in-house and packaged software investments at the industry level under different SIOs is developed and empirically tested based on a panel dataset of private industries in the USA between 1998 and 2020. Findings The results show that with the increase in the number of SIOs in an industry, the economic performance of in-house software investments increases, while that of packaged software investments decreases. Originality/value By highlighting the role of SIOs in moderating the economic performance of in-house and packaged software, this study shows the critical role of the information technology (IT) environment in understanding software's economic value.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.631
Threshold uncertainty score0.780

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 communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.141 · 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