MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390103358 · doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2023.10.003

Contract selection for collaborative innovation in the new energy vehicle supply chain under the dual credit policy: Cost sharing and benefit sharing

2023· article· en· W4390103358 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hu Jun, Jie Wu, Zhuang Fei, Mengzhe Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chainProfit (economics)Revenue sharingBusinessRevenueProfit modelIndustrial organizationProfit sharingMicroeconomicsMarketingEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dual point policy is an important policy in the field of China's new energy vehicle industry, various factors such as point trading prices and technological innovation costs were included in the profit game model to explore the effects of cost contract model and revenue contract model on the optimal profit of new energy vehicle supply entities after collaborative decision-making. Research has found that the dual credit policy for China's new energy industry has a promoting effect on collaborative innovation among entities in the new energy vehicle supply chain; Compared with decentralized decision-making situations, the integration of cost sharing contracts or revenue sharing contracts can more effectively stimulate the innovation vitality of new energy battery suppliers and enhance their technological innovation level; Under the cost sharing contract and the benefit sharing contract, the optimal profit after collaborative decision-making between new energy vehicle manufacturers and new energy battery suppliers is greater than the optimal profit during decentralized decision-making, while the optimal profit of new energy vehicle supply chain entities under the benefit sharing contract is slightly higher than the optimal profit of new energy vehicle supply chain entities under the cost sharing contract.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering ComputationsSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207