MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405794400 · doi:10.5267/j.uscm.2024.10.008

Developing brand sustainability strategy using AI as a powerful tool in auto industry

2024· article· en· W4405794400 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ahmad Al Adwan, Ghaiath Altrjman, Lu’ay Al-Mu’ani

Bibliographic record

VenueUncertain Supply Chain Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicImpact of AI and Big Data on Business and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityAuto industryBusinessComputer scienceProcess managementMarketingIndustrial organizationEnvironmental economicsAutomotive industryEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Manufacturers employ AI for monitoring vehicle mileage, inspecting components, and scheduling maintenance. Past studies underscore the need for auto-related plans to prioritize environmental protection, concentrating on AI-driven environmental solutions promoted by AI for Good. AI enhances brand success by improving investment, technology, and promotional capabilities. This study emphasizes consistency in AI application across the automotive value chain for brand sustainability. A web-based poll surveyed 120 AI users in marketing, HR, sustainability, as well as 180 sustainability specialists and regulators. The primary goal is to assess, via structural model evaluation, how extraneous variables affect the development of AI-powered brand sustainability strategies. The study highlights AI's sustainability benefits in the automotive industry improving transportation safety, forecasting maintenance, and creating eco-friendly vehicles. However, challenges involve over-reliance on AI, predicting human behavior, and addressing sustainability threats. AI development should consider regional differences, prioritizing openness, policy harmony, and consumer agency. These findings aid marketing and HR professionals in devising customer-centric long-term plans.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUncertain Supply Chain ManagementSame topicImpact of AI and Big Data on Business and SocietyFrench-language works237,207