MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132481092

Fugumobile: Setting Up a Local Digital Marketing Company in China

2022· other· en· W7132481092 on OpenAlexaff
S. Ramakrishna Velamuri, Huirong Ju, G. Venkat Raman, Saripalli Bhavani Shankar

Bibliographic record

VenueCEIBS Institutional Repository · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsCentre Casa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaAgile software developmentPosition (finance)FuguResource (disambiguation)Human resource managementCorporation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This case study describes the challenges Fugumobile Co. Ltd. (referred to as "Fugu") faced in sustaining profitable growth in its business. Founded by two Indian expatriates, Ranjit Singh and Ravi Shankar Bose, Fugu had a humble start in a rented apartment in 2006. It organically grew in China by adapting to the evolving trends in digital marketing. However, Ranjit and Ravi are aware that it is challenging to sustain the growth. Fugu is faced with a critical decision to reach out to a larger client base with the current standardized offerings at affordable prices or position itself as a company with value-added offerings at a premium price. For the first alternative, Fugu needed to reduce costs by improving human resource management and efficiency. The organization also needed to recruit capable staff who were agile and comfortable with multi-tasking. Fugu needed to recruit experienced personnel with a proven track record of delivering high-quality services for the latter strategy. It needed to build an image of a resourceful and capable organization with the ability to handle premium clients.

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)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCEIBS Institutional RepositoryFrench-language works237,207