Large Scale Supply Chain Innovation in Canadian Wineries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With big data analytics rising in popularity, academics practitioners have been thinking about the ways through which they are able to get the shifts these solutions bring into the competitive strategies. Drawing on the resource-based point of view, capabilities, and on the latest literature on big data analytics, this particular analysis examines the indirect connection in between a big data analytics capability and two kinds of development abilities, radical and incremental. The study extends existing investigation by proposing BDACs enable firms to produce insight that may help strengthen the dynamic capabilities, which positively influence radical and incremental innovation capabilities. In order to test our proposed hypothesis, we used survey information from 185 chief officers and the managers operating in Italian firms. By way of partial least squares structural equation modeling, outcomes verify our assumptions about the indirect impact which BDACs have on development abilities. Particularly, we discover that dynamic abilities fully mediate the result on both radical and incremental innovation capabilities. Additionally, under conditions of higher environmentally friendly heterogeneity, the effect of BDAC's on powerful features, and in sequence, incremental innovation ability is improved, while under conditions of high environmentally friendly dynamism the impact of powerful abilities on incremental innovation abilities is amplified.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".