Researching Digital Entrepreneurship: Current Issues and Suggestions for Future Directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report documents the outcomes of a professional development workshop (PDW) held at the 40th International Conference on Information Systems in Munich, Germany. The workshop’s goal was to identify how information systems (IS) researchers can contribute to enriching the understanding of digital entrepreneurship—that is, the intersection of digital technologies and entrepreneurship. The PDW assembled numerous IS researchers working on different aspects of digital entrepreneurship. Jointly, we delineated digital entrepreneurship from related phenomena and conceptualized different roles of digital technologies for entrepreneurial endeavors. We also identified relevant strategies, opportunities, and challenges in conducting digital entrepreneurship research. This report summarizes the shared views that emerged from the interactions at the PDW and during the collaborative writing of this report. The report provides IS researchers interested in digital entrepreneurship with food for thought and a foundation for future research.
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 | 0.077 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.025 | 0.052 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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.
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".