MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6945450215 · doi:10.25318/3310014701-fra

Importance des motifs justifiant l’achat de biens ou de services auprès d’une entreprise étrangère non affiliée, selon l'industrie et la taille de l’entreprise

2019· dataset· fr· W6945450215 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics Canada Dissemination · 2019
Typedataset
Languagefr
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimitingAgrégationScaling law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pourcentage d’entreprises dont les motifs pour l’achat de biens ou de services auprès d’entreprises étrangères non affiliées n’étaient pas importants du tout ou étaient un peu importants, importants, très importants ou sans objet, selon le code du Système de classification des industries de l’Amérique du Nord (SCIAN) et la taille de l’entreprise, sur une période d’observation d’un an. Les motifs pour l’achat de biens ou de services auprès d’entreprises étrangères non affiliées peuvent comprendre les suivants : réduction des coûts de main-d’œuvre, réduction des coûts autres que ceux de la main-d’œuvre, qualité supérieure des biens ou des services, absence de fournisseurs au Canada, réduction des délais de livraison, amélioration de l’accès aux chaînes d’approvisionnement ou aux réseaux commerciaux régionaux, accès aux connaissances ou aux technologies spécialisées, incitatifs fiscaux ou autres incitatifs financiers, manque de main-d’œuvre disponible au Canada et autres motifs justifiant l’achat de biens ou de services auprès d’une entreprise non affiliée à l’extérieur du Canada. Les estimations se rapportent à l’exercice financier 2017 (la date de fin se situant entre le 1er janvier 2017 et le 31 décembre 2017).

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics Canada DisseminationSame topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207