MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416165535 · doi:10.1177/21582440251377433

Research on the Influence Mechanism of Digital Transformation on the Development of New Quality Productive Forces in Manufacturing Enterprises – Based on the Spatial Perspective

2025· article· en· W4416165535 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Lu, Min Tianwei, Tony Fang

Bibliographic record

VenueSAGE Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital transformationMediationProductivityQuality (philosophy)Panel dataManufacturingPerspective (graphical)Production (economics)Mechanism (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As digital transformation (Digital) accelerates globally, conventional enterprise production models are proving increasingly insufficient to meet the demands of today’s dynamic market landscape. China has innovated the concept of New Quality Productivity (NQPF), and exploring its functioning is critical to promoting high-quality enterprise development. This study examines the impact mechanism of Digital on NQPF in manufacturing firms by applying spatial econometric models—including the spatial Durbin model, spatial mediation model, and spatial threshold model—to panel data from A-share listed manufacturers (2013–2022). The results indicate that digital transformation significantly influences the level of NQPF, exhibiting spatial spillover effects and spatial attenuation boundaries. This influence initially promotes and subsequently inhibits productivity. The analysis of the spatial mediation effect reveals that Digital affects enterprise productivity levels by influencing total factor productivity. Furthermore, the spatial threshold effect analysis indicates that higher total enterprise assets enhance the positive impact of Digital on NQPF. These results provide robust micro-level empirical evidence to inform manufacturing enterprise development strategies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.344
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAGE OpenSame topicDigital Transformation in IndustryFrench-language works237,207