Places and spaces of collaborative R&D and innovation: navigating the role of physical and virtual contexts
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The context in which collaborative R&D and innovation activities take place is a critical driver of success and failure. However, innovation management research tends to often abstract the context away, leaving the crucial contingency factors unaddressed. This special issue explores multifaceted collaborative R&D and innovation contexts across physical and virtual domains. An array of ten articles dissect various contexts, including cross‐sector partnerships, innovation hubs, living labs, makerspaces, and virtual collaboration spaces and communities, highlighting their impact on innovation processes and outcomes. In this editorial, we develop a ‘Collaborative Innovation Space Matrix’ to firstly integrate the insights from the special issue focusing on collaboration dynamics and type of spaces and, secondly, to propose a call for action for innovation researchers to better understand the crucial role of context in collaborative R&D and innovation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it