MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Social Media Changes the Market Based on Marketing

2023· article· en· W4389204331 on OpenAlexaff
Xinwei Ou

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Economics Management and Political Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaDatabase transactionInteractivityBusinessAdvertisingMarketingComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary goal of this essay is to examine the effects of social media's ongoing development on the market against the backdrop of the explosive growth of MLM-based information. It focuses on comparing the success of the early traditional e-commerce online shopping media "Amazon" and "Taobao" and the success of the modern e-commerce online shopping media "TikTok." By analyzing the operation mode of "Taobao" and "TikTok" and comparing the changes of user data and transaction amount. It can be concluded that users will constantly put forward new needs with the continuous update of technology, and social media will constantly solve the needs of customers to update. This update will continue to maintain and enhance the convenience offered by social media online shopping, and continue to attract new users. From the perspective of marketing, social media constantly solves the needs of consumers and provides interactivity, which makes people more willing to purchase and evaluate products and feedback merchants through social media. For merchants, studying such topics can quickly find and use social media more in line with consumer needs to "interact" and increase their sales channels and quantity.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0120.015
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueAdvances in Economics Management and Political SciencesSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207