MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6996759718

Study of the growth opportunities and barriers facing engineering and technology-based SMEs in emerging economies: cases from Egypt

2018· dissertation· en· W6996759718 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUPCommons institutional repository (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMRI in cancer diagnosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmerging marketsFace (sociological concept)Private sectorEmerging technologiesMarket shareSmall and medium-sized enterprisesMarket penetration
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The TFM should provide a review of the evaluation of two SMEs’ experiences doing business in Egypt. The experiences of the two SMEs will demonstrate the business opportunities and obstacles that engineering and technology-based SMEs face in emerging economies. The two chosen SMEs are different in terms of sector and nationality to provide a good perspective. The first SME is an Egyptian company working in the renewable energy that has a success story collaborating in Egyptian governmental project with Spanish, Chinese and Saudi partners. The second SME is a Canadian company working in the construction sector that is entering the Egyptian market to provide a new construction technology solution using wood and clay as a construction material instead of steel reinforced concrete. Both companies not only share the size or the status of start-up growing to medium but also share the first mover advantage as they both introducing new technologies to the Egyptian market. The TFM will attempt to identify, evaluate and analyse the opportunities and barriers both companies face doing business in Egypt either with public or private sector. The TFM shall provide a review of the evaluation of the two cases through conducting interviews with the companies CEOs, the executive teams, and the clients. At least one specific project for each of the two SMEs will be analysed and reviewed as a case study. The objective is to share the analysis of both companies experiences so future engineering and technology companies, either from the same country or from abroad, interested in working in emerging economies in general or in Egypt specifically can better manage their risks.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.229 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUPCommons institutional repository (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya)Same topicMRI in cancer diagnosisFrench-language works237,207