MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Insights on the Determinants of Scientific Knowledge Production

2023· article· en· W4385212501 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gabriel Cavalli, Anita M. McGahan, Michael Blomfield, Caroline Fry, Matteo Tranchero, Keyvan Vakili, Soomi Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduction (economics)Knowledge productionData scienceKnowledge managementComputer scienceBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scholars of Strategic Management, Technology and Innovation Management, and Research Methods have recently sought to integrate theories that investigate the determinants of scientific knowledge production. In this Symposium, we propose to advance research on these determinants through the presentation of scholarly papers by four authors, each of whom will present recent findings developed with co-authors on this topic. The papers will be discussed formally by an emerging scholar in this domain. The purpose of the symposium is to support scholarly dialogue among participants, with the discussant, and in a question-and-answer session with attendees. We envision that this dialogue will advance frontier approaches to understanding how scientific knowledge production can be fostered institutionally, organizationally, and methodologically. Stimulating Innovation on Neglected Diseases: Institutional Development and Knowledge Production Author: Gabriel Cavalli; U. of Toronto, Rotman School of Management Author: Michael Blomfield; U. of Massachusetts, Amherst Author: Anita McGahan; U. of Toronto Author: Keyvan Vakili; London Business School Migration and Global Network Formation: Evidence from Female Scientists in Developing Countries Author: Caroline Fry; Massachusetts Institute of Technology Author: Jeffrey Furman; Boston U. How does Data Access shape Science? Evidence from the Impact of U.S. Census’s Research Data Centers Author: Abhishek Nagaraj; UC Berkeley & NBER Author: Matteo Tranchero; Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley The Pursuit of Novelty in Science and Technology Author: Keyvan Vakili; London Business School Author: Michael A. Bikard; INSEAD Author: Florenta Teodoridis; California Southern U.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.111
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Incentives · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.111
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0030.011
Scholarly communication0.0190.015
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.187 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainIncentives
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207