MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Creating Knowledge over Distance

2025· book· en· W4410885490 on OpenAlexaff
Harald Bathelt, Sebastian Henn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The prime goal of this book is to show that economic knowledge creation fundamentally depends on, benefits from, and is structured by temporary geographical proximity—that is, by economic actors meeting in person to discuss business opportunities, problems, and solutions face to face. During the Covid-19 pandemic, personal meetings often had to be reduced or were replaced by virtual meetings, leading many observers to assume a fundamental reconfiguration of economic life in the future. While communication patterns certainly changed during this period, the authors’ agenda in this book is to demonstrate that the face-to-face meetings they investigate across a sequence of chapters are unlikely to be fully substituted by distant interactions, and may even become more important over time. They develop their argument by systematically analysing three configurations of knowledge transfers over distance: (1) international community gatherings, such as trade fairs, conventions, and conferences, (2) mobile business practices, including intra-firm business coordination, producer–user meetings, and inter-firm negotiations, as well as (3) transnational networks, related to transnational corporations and transnational migrant firms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0100.010
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.005

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207