MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409605136 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-333

A study of the impact of corporate market forecasting capability on the accuracy of strategic decision-making based on computational analysis of business data

2025· article· en· W4409605136 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBusinessManagement scienceEconometricsOperations researchArtificial intelligenceEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study focuses on the computational analysis of business data, constructs a market prediction framework that integrates K-means clustering, feature standardization and improved N-BEATS model, and verifies its effect on the accuracy of enterprise strategic decision-making based on multi-source data.The study selects real-time transaction data and weather data from 800 merchants under Alibaba, extracts key features through standardization and correlation analysis, and improves the model by introducing topological features and multi-attention mechanism, which significantly optimizes the time series prediction accuracy and reduces the RMSE by 18.6%.The empirical analysis for tissue paper category shows that the forecast error rate of the time series decomposition method is only 0.58%, which is better than the traditional trend method and seasonal index method.Through the regression analysis of 328 business managers' questionnaires, data-driven analysis β=0.617, p<0.001 and innovative forecasting β=0.594, p<0.001 have a significant positive effect on strategic decisionmaking accuracy and consensus.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207