The role of pre-formation intangible assets in the endowment of science-based university spin-offs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Science-based university spin-offs face considerable technology and market uncertainty over extended periods of time, increasing the challenges of commercialisation. Scientist-entrepreneurs can play formative roles in commercialising lab-based scientific inventions through the formation of well-endowed university spin-offs. Through case study analysis of three science-based university spin-offs within a biotechnology innovation ecosystem, we unpack the impact of pre-formation intangible assets of academic scientists (research excellence, patenting, and international networks) and their entrepreneurial capabilities on spin-off performance. We find evidence that the pre-formation entrepreneurial capabilities of academic scientists can endow science-based university spin-offs by leveraging the scientists' pre-formation intangible assets. A theory-driven model depicting the role of pre-formation intangible assets and entrepreneurial capabilities in endowing science-based university spin-offs is developed. Recommendations are provided for scholars, practitioners, and policymakers to more effectively commercialise high potential inventions in the university lab through the development and deployment of pre-formation intangible assets and entrepreneurial capabilities.
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 | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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".