Search results

China is currently developing and promoting an industrial cluster policy at the government level. By enacting the ‘Opinion on promoting industrial cluster development’, China is supporting the development of industrial clusters. Building an industrial cluster is done by using a single factor but requires many additional factors like regional characteristics, competitiveness factors are also diversified. To evaluate the competitiveness of the Chinese automobile industry cluster, a competitiveness element index should be developed and a competitiveness evaluation method is needed to evaluate the importance of each element. To accomplish this objective, this research applied the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and focused on the importance of the competitiveness elements.

This research investigated the character is tics regarding cases of clusters and also analyzed the competitiveness of the Changchun automobile cluster located in northeastern China. The purpose of this research is to help Korean enterprises who enter China in the hopes that Korea will emerge as a top automobile production country.

The media has even been very critical of some East Asian countries’ use of digital contact-tracing to control Covid-19. For example, South Korea has been criticised for its use of privacy-infringing digital contact-tracing. However, whether their type of digital contact-tracing was unnecessarily harmful to the human rights of Korean citizens is open for debate. The purpose of this paper is to examine this criticism to see if Korea’s digital contact-tracing is ethically justifiable.

This paper will evaluate Korea’s digital contact-tracing through the lens of the four human rights principles to determine if their response is ethically justifiable. These four principles were originally outlined in the European Court of Human Rights, namely, necessary, proportional, scientifically valid and time-bounded (European Court of Human Rights 1950).

The paper will propose that while the use of Korea’s digital contact-tracing was scientifically valid and proportionate (albeit, in need for improvements), it meets the necessity requirement, but is too vague to meet the time-boundedness requirement.

The Covid-19 pandemic has proven to be one of the worst threats to human health and the global economy in the past century. There have been many different strategies to tackle the pandemic, from somewhat laissez-faire approaches, herd immunity, to strict draconian measures. Analysis of the approaches taken in the response to the pandemic is of high scientific value and this paper is one of the first to critically engage with one of these methods – digital contact-tracing in South Korea.

This paper investigates a retrospective on the Journal of Derivatives and Quantitative Studies (JDQS) on its 30th anniversary based on bibliometric. JDQSs yearly publications, citations, impact factors, and centrality indices grew up in early 2010s, and diminished in 2020. Keyword network analysis reveals the JDQS's main keywords including behavioral finance, implied volatility, information asymmetry, price discovery, KOSPI200 futures, volatility, and KOSPI200 options. Citations of JDQS articles are mainly driven by article age, demeaned age squared, conference, nonacademic authors and language. In comparison between number of views and downloads for JDQS articles, we find that recent changes in publisher and editorial and publishing policies have increased visibility of JDQS.

Objectively evaluating the fairness of the algorithm, exploring in specific scenarios combined with scenario characteristics and constructing the algorithm fairness evaluation index system in specific scenarios.

This paper selects marketing scenarios, and in accordance with the idea of “theory construction-scene feature extraction-enterprise practice,” summarizes the definition and standard of fairness, combs the application link process of marketing algorithms and establishes the fairness evaluation index system of marketing equity allocation algorithms. Taking simulated marketing data as an example, the fairness performance of marketing algorithms in some feature areas is measured, and the effectiveness of the evaluation system proposed in this paper is verified.

The study reached the following conclusions: (1) Different fairness evaluation criteria have different emphases, and may produce different results. Therefore, different fairness definitions and standards should be selected in different fields according to the characteristics of the scene. (2) The fairness of the marketing equity distribution algorithm can be measured from three aspects: marketing coverage, marketing intensity and marketing frequency. Specifically, for the fairness of coverage, two standards of equal opportunity and different misjudgment rates are selected, and the standard of group fairness is selected for intensity and frequency. (3) For different characteristic fields, different degrees of fairness restrictions should be imposed, and the interpretation of their calculation results and the means of subsequent intervention should also be different according to the marketing objectives and industry characteristics.

First of all, the fairness sensitivity of different feature fields is different, but this paper does not classify the importance of feature fields. In the future, we can build a classification table of sensitive attributes according to the importance of sensitive attributes to give different evaluation and protection priorities. Second, in this paper, only one set of marketing data simulation data is selected to measure the overall algorithm fairness, after which multiple sets of marketing campaigns can be measured and compared to reflect the long-term performance of marketing algorithm fairness. Third, this paper does not continue to explore interventions and measures to improve algorithmic fairness. Different feature fields should be subject to different degrees of fairness constraints, and therefore their subsequent interventions should be different, which needs to be continued to be explored in future research.

This paper combines the specific features of marketing scenarios and selects appropriate fairness evaluation criteria to build an index system for fairness evaluation of marketing algorithms, which provides a reference for assessing and managing the fairness of marketing algorithms.

Algorithm governance and algorithmic fairness are very important issues in the era of artificial intelligence, and the construction of the algorithmic fairness evaluation index system in marketing scenarios in this paper lays a safe foundation for the application of AI algorithms and technologies in marketing scenarios, provides tools and means of algorithm governance and empowers the promotion of safe, efficient and orderly development of algorithms.

In this paper, firstly, the standards of fairness are comprehensively sorted out, and the difference between different standards and evaluation focuses is clarified, and secondly, focusing on the marketing scenario, combined with its characteristics, key fairness evaluation links are put forward, and different standards are innovatively selected to evaluate the fairness in the process of applying marketing algorithms and to build the corresponding index system, which forms the systematic fairness evaluation tool of marketing algorithms.