MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404634189 · doi:10.1017/9781009279277.005

Innovation Typologies

2024· book-chapter· en· W4404634189 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter explains and discusses different innovation typologies. “Typology” refers to not only types of innovation but also other aspects. This chapter explains and discusses innovation types, including product or service (e.g., using online system by public organizations), process (e.g., one-stop-shops), mission (e.g., get to the Moon), policy (e.g., energy), partner (e.g., collaborating with business and nonprofit organizations to deliver services), citizen (e.g., codesigning parks with citizens), technological (e.g., new online car registration), social (e.g., providing affordable housing), governance (e.g., citizen participation apps), marketing or communication (e.g., promotion of public services), and rhetorical innovations (e.g., a new logo, without changing organizational structure) in the public sector. In addition to these innovation types, this chapter also discusses other typologies and aspects, including the radical (or breakthrough, e.g., Open University), incremental innovations (e.g., non-disruptive innovation), complex (e.g., introducing a toll charge in a road), and open innovations (e.g., civic hackathons) in the public sector. This chapter offers insights into how these distinctions matter for innovative activities.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0180.015
Science and technology studies0.0070.012
Scholarly communication0.0130.016
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.004

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicInnovation and Socioeconomic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207