MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319014180 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-17403-2_2

Humanism and the Cooperative Enterprise: Theoretical Foundations

2023· book-chapter· en· W4319014180 on OpenAlexaff
Sonja Novković, Cian McMahon

Bibliographic record

VenueHumanism in business series · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCooperative Studies and Economics
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceAlliancePublic relationsBusinessIdentity (music)ShareholderSet (abstract data type)HumanismWork (physics)Control (management)ManagementPolitical scienceEconomicsEngineeringLawComputer scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In line with the International Cooperative Alliance (ICA) Statement on the Cooperative Identity and definition of a cooperative enterprise (ICA in Guidance notes to the co-operative principles. https://www.ica.coop/en/media/library/research-and-reviews/guidance-notes-cooperative-principles , 2015), we set out to frame a theory of cooperative governance with the focus on a collective membership, whereby control of the enterprise is acquired by engaging with (via patronage/usership/work) rather than investing in the firm. The term often used to describe this type of enterprise is “member-owned business” (MOB; Birchall in People-centred businesses: Co-operatives, mutuals and the idea of membership. Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), underscoring the primacy of member contribution to the operations and governance of the enterprise in different capacities as workers, consumers, and suppliers, rather than merely investors.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.044
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumanism in business seriesSame topicCooperative Studies and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207