MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416423101 · doi:10.37380/jisib.v15.si1.00

AI-Driven Competitive Intelligence in Decision-Making

2025· article· en· W4416423101 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intelligence Studies in Business · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCompetitive and Knowledge Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredictive analyticsBusiness intelligenceAnalyticsCompetitive intelligenceFlexibility (engineering)Big dataWeb intelligenceIntuitionContext (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This issue brings together the authors’ research, which reveals important and unique themes in the context of understanding competitive environment, which resonate with modern scientific development trends and the dynamics of change. Scientific research offers an in-depth look at current challenges that shape future research directions.Traditional data analysis, which used to be based on human intuition and limited data interpretation, has been transformed today with the introduction of artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies. In today’s business environment characterized by rapid change and high uncertainty, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and sound strategies is an essential prerequisite for competitiveness. Predictive analytics is one of the main areas of application of artificial intelligence in data analysis, when organizations face a high level of complexity, determined by dynamic environmental changes and affecting the strategic decisions of organizations.AI-driven competitive intelligence uses advanced algorithms and predictive analytics tools that can identify market trends and competitive strategies. AI-powered predictive models are particularly effective at identifying hidden patterns in complex data sets, providing companies with insights that would be difficult to uncover using traditional methods (Basu, Aktar & Kumar, 2024). Organizations are increasingly incorporating algorithmic and analytical tools into their operations and strategies, using them not only for automation, but also for generating insights and ensuring strategic alignment. Such an approach significantly improves the quality of decision-making, providing organizations with flexibility and the ability to adapt to a dynamic environment in a timely manner (Smyth C. et al., 2024). In turn, the challenge for organizations is to ensure that the information generated by these systems is transformed into organizational knowledge and practical value that has long-term benefits.Another major trend is the rise of social media as a source of knowledge. Once considered secondary, social platforms have become essential for gaining real-time insights into markets, the success of competitors and partners, and consumer opinions. By effectively integrating these unstructured data streams, organizations can significantly improve their situational awareness and resilience in a rapidly changing environment, as they are able to identify both direct and indirect trends, namely, obvious changes in the market and hidden, contextual relationships that affect consumer behavior, competitor strategies, and market dynamics. However, this approach increases the need for data validation, critical analysis, and high-level analytical skills to effectively manage the diversity of digital information and ensure its accurate interpretation. Consequently, organizations simultaneously face a significant challenge, as the growth in the volume and diversity of such data significantly increases the need for careful data validation, critical analysis, and high-level analytical skills.To fully exploit the potential of AI and big data, interdisciplinary skills are required - the ability to combine technological understanding with strategic thinking and critical evaluation of information. Such an approach ensures that the use of data not only improves organizational efficiency, but also promotes sustainable decision-making based on reliable and interpretable data.We would like to express our gratitude to the authors for their analytical perspectives, sharing of research results and contribution to the creation of this publication.

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.

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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.325 · 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