MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362576132 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v14n2p79

Improvisation in the Management of Lithuanian Art Organisations

2023· article· en· W4362576132 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Daiva Masaityte, Virginia Jureniene

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCreativity in Education and Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImprovisationCreativityLithuanianPhenomenonBusinessProduct (mathematics)MarketingQualitative researchNew product developmentKnowledge managementSociologyPublic relationsPolitical sciencePsychologyComputer scienceSocial scienceSocial psychologyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today, creativity is essential in not only art and culture, but it is also applied in science, economics, and is inseparable from improvisation in management. Creativity-related art industry helps to create new jobs and encourages development of other economic sectors; however, the complexity of assessment of the created product creates a challenge of increased market risk more than in companies in other sectors. Today, creativity relates to not only art, but also competitive advantage of organisations, innovation and is the most important driving force of economy; thus, it is important to understand the application of improvisation in management of art organisations.This article analyses how representatives of organisations understand improvisation in management, what experience members of organisations have and where (which stages of management) improvisation is applied.Research method: in order to find out about the phenomenon under research and collect as much information as possible, this study includes the qualitative method of multiple cases.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicCreativity in Education and NeuroscienceFrench-language works237,207