Positioning RFID Technology Into The Innovation Theory Landscape: A Multidimensional Perspective Integrating Case Study Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this paper is to analyze RFID technology as an innovation concept through the lens of the diffusion of innovation theory. Drawing on the extant literature on the diffusion of innovations –with an emphasis on innovation classifications and the “open innovation”–, as well as on an analysis of a longitudinal case study conducted in a Canadian beverage supply chain currently exploring the potential of RFID technology, this research study suggests that RFID technology is a multidimensional concept than encompasses the traditional classifications of innovations (e.g., technological and organizational innovation, product and process innovation, incremental and radical innovation, interactive innovation) and emerging classifications such as open innovation. Therefore, any study on the assessment of the impact of RFID-enabled supply chain optimization should be aware of the locus of interest of each supply chain stakeholder with regard to RFID technology in order to better capture the network effect associated with the technology.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".