MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390826040 · doi:10.3390/encyclopedia4010012

Co-Creation

2024· article· en· W4390826040 on OpenAlexaff
Myriam Ertz

Bibliographic record

VenueEncyclopedia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicService and Product Innovation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCo-creationBusinessProcess (computing)New product developmentProduct (mathematics)Knowledge managementProcess managementMarketingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Co-creation has gained traction in recent years and various fields, including marketing, product development, and innovation studies, as it leverages the collective expertise and insights of multiple parties to enhance outcomes. Broadly, co-creation refers to the collaborative process of involving stakeholders, such as customers, suppliers, employees, or the public, in creating or improving products, services, or experiences.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.010
Scholarly communication0.0160.013
Open science0.0030.021
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.021

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncyclopediaSame topicService and Product InnovationFrench-language works237,207