MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391259657 · doi:10.54097/wqxqzg03

Analysis of How Enterprises Can Improve Market Competitiveness in the Context of Digital Transformation - Take Amazon as an Example

2024· article· en· W4391259657 on OpenAlexaff
Jiaqi Liu, Xuanyu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueHighlights in Business Economics and Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicE-commerce and Technology Innovations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultinational corporationLeverage (statistics)Digital transformationBusinessBusiness modelContext (archaeology)Amazon rainforestMarketingE-commerceIndustrial organizationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multinational companies have emerged as the primary driving force behind the global economic integration trend. With the advancement of digital tools and technologies, there has been a significant increase in people's demand for digital services and experiences. This shift in consumer behaviour has created a pressing need for multinational companies to embrace digital transformation to meet these evolving needs and further stimulate economic development. One crucial aspect of this transformation is cross-border e-commerce, which plays a vital role in the strategies of multinational companies. As a successful example, Amazon has effectively undergone this transformation and is a model for others. By analyzing Amazon's experience using the 4P marketing model and data analysis, valuable insights and suggestions can be provided to companies seeking digital transformation. This will enable them to adapt to the changing digital landscape, enhance their global competitiveness, and thrive in the dynamic and interconnected global market. With the right strategies and implementation of digital tools, companies can leverage the power of technology to expand their reach, improve customer experiences, and drive sustainable growth in the digital era.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHighlights in Business Economics and ManagementSame topicE-commerce and Technology InnovationsFrench-language works237,207