MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405642202 · doi:10.1186/s13731-024-00453-w

Thought clarity to execution chaos: a review on core competencies of grassroots entrepreneurs for instigation, growth and sustainability of startups

2024· review· en· W4405642202 on OpenAlexaff
Isha Nag, Sridhar Manohar, Amit Mittal, Arjun J. Nair

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsSt. Lawrence College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrassrootsCLARITYSustainabilityEntrepreneurshipCore (optical fiber)Core competencyBusinessCHAOS (operating system)Public relationsManagementMarketingPolitical scienceEconomicsEngineeringComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endeavoring to comprehend the recent surge in empirical and theoretical research ventures on grass root entrepreneurial competencies, the study initially intends to shed light on the current trends and future directions that facilitate in assimilating the reasons for declining growth stability. Moreover, as the emerging interest and importance of entrepreneurs in bottom of the pyramid market, the research attempts to classify exclusive competencies, barriers and support requisite for sustainability. The articles selected and shortlisted from the Scopus database is accumulated to 1486 documents, retrieved between 1971 and 2022 was utilized to perform the bibliometric analysis. The classification identified the need for future research in grassroots competencies, sustainable startups, circular economy, barriers and facilitators in low-income society. The findings stimulate scholars to work on to bring new approaches, theories and business models for both government and organizations during skill development programs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Innovation and EntrepreneurshipSame topicInnovation and Socioeconomic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207