ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2026
The Configurational Logic of Alliance Networks for Innovation: A Machine Learning-Enabled Investigation.
Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Alliance network embeddedness provides firms with access to external knowledge and resources, yet its innovation implications vary across firms and network contexts. This study examines how network structure and combinations of embedding characteristics are associated with corporate innovation performance. Based on 335 firm-level observations from Chinese listed biopharmaceutical manufacturing firms, the study first identifies heterogeneous alliance network environments through community detection and K-Means clustering. Four network types are identified: dyadic, ringlike, star, and complex alliances. Classification and regression trees (CART) are then employed to extract interpretable, threshold-based decision rules linking network embedding characteristics to high and non-high innovation performance. The results show that no single network characteristic is consistently associated with innovation performance across alliance types. In dyadic alliances, moderate cooperation intensity is associated with high innovation performance, whereas ringlike alliances exhibit conditional associations involving cooperation intensity and partner centrality. Star alliances are characterized by configurations involving cooperation breadth and network position, while complex alliances exhibit more multidimensional combinations of structural and relational conditions. The findings indicate that the innovation relevance of alliance network embeddedness is network-type-specific and configuration-dependent. As a complementary robustness analysis, fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis broadly supports several core configurational patterns identified by CART, while also revealing alternative configurations, particularly in complex alliances. The study demonstrates that understanding alliance network embeddedness requires attention to network context, empirical thresholds, and combinations of network characteristics rather than isolated network attributes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.