MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099350288

Toronto

2005· article· en· W7099350288 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetitor analysisEmerging technologiesPoint (geometry)Market orientationGeniusMarket analysisCompetition (biology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Because of rapid technology and market changes, high tech firms often think it isn’t a good idea to be attuned to markets, but rather they need only to keep their eye on the technology itself. This survey of telecommunications firms reveals the importance of a market orientation extends to these firms and is a consistent predictor of performance. Technology intensive firms have consistently argued that managing these firms is different from managing in other business sectors. Because of rapidly changing technologies and markets, management must focus on the technologies and their development over attention to market needs. In fact, too much market responsiveness will doom firms to losing their technology lead. While many engineers-cum managers who are at the helm of technology intensive firms and are often the inventor-entrepreneur would like to believe that it is their inventive genius that will win markets (“If I build it, they will come”), there is lots of evidence that even technologically superior ideas can lose out to better marketed ones (the classic –beta vs. VCR). On the other hand, Christensen and Raynor (2003) point out that focusing on current markets can relegate market winners to market losers because they stake their claim on current customers while competitors find new technologies and new markets as a breeding ground for

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207