Private or Public Equity? The Evolving Entrepreneurial Finance Landscape

Mapping Intimacies ◽

10.31235/osf.io/9am4w ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Michael Ewens ◽

Joan Farre-Mensa

Keyword(s):

Entrepreneurial Finance ◽

Going Public ◽

Public Firms ◽

Open Research ◽

Trade Offs ◽

Private Market ◽

Private And Public ◽

Research Questions ◽

Public Equity ◽

Number Of Firms

The U.S. entrepreneurial finance market has changed dramatically over the last two decades. Entrepreneurs raising their first round of venture capital retain 30% more equity in their firm and are more likely to control their board of directors. Late-stage startups are raising larger amounts of capital in the private markets from a growing pool of traditional and new investors. These private market changes have coincided with a sharp decline in the number of firms going public--and when firms do go public, they are older and have raised more private capital. To understand these facts, we provide a systematic description of the differences between private and public firms. Next, we review several regulatory, technological, and competitive changes affecting both startups and investors that reveal how the trade-offs between going public and staying private have changed. We conclude by listing several open research questions.

Download Full-text

Defining and measuring microservice granularity—a literature overview

PeerJ Computer Science ◽

10.7717/peerj-cs.695 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 7 ◽

pp. e695

Author(s):

Fredy H. Vera-Rivera ◽

Carlos Gaona ◽

Hernán Astudillo

Keyword(s):

Quality Attributes ◽

Exclusion Criteria ◽

Field Development ◽

Literature Overview ◽

Open Research ◽

Trade Offs ◽

Research Questions ◽

And Performance ◽

Definition Of ◽

Computational Resources

Background Microservices are an architectural approach of growing use, and the optimal granularity of a microservice directly affects the application’s quality attributes and usage of computational resources. Determining microservice granularity is an open research topic. Methodology We conducted a systematic literature review to analyze literature that addresses the definition of microservice granularity. We searched in IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library and Scopus. The research questions were: Which approaches have been proposed to define microservice granularity and determine the microservices’ size? Which metrics are used to evaluate microservice granularity? Which quality attributes are addressed when researching microservice granularity? Results We found 326 papers and selected 29 after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. The quality attributes most often addressed are runtime properties (e.g., scalability and performance), not development properties (e.g., maintainability). Most proposed metrics were about the product, both static (coupling, cohesion, complexity, source code) and runtime (performance, and usage of computational resources), and a few were about the development team and process. The most used techniques for defining microservices granularity were machine learning (clustering), semantic similarity, genetic programming, and domain engineering. Most papers were concerned with migration from monoliths to microservices; and a few addressed green-field development, but none address improvement of granularity in existing microservice-based systems. Conclusions Methodologically speaking, microservice granularity research is at a Wild West stage: no standard definition, no clear development—operation trade-offs, and scarce conceptual reuse (e.g., few methods seem applicable or replicable in projects other than their initial proposal). These gaps in granularity research offer clear options to investigate on continuous improvement of the development and operation of microservice-based systems.

Download Full-text

Introduction to biometric measures for Games User Research

10.1093/oso/9780198794844.003.0016 ◽

2018 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Lennart E. Nacke

Keyword(s):

Physiological Data ◽

Biometric Data ◽

User Research ◽

Academic Practice ◽

The Past ◽

Informed Decisions ◽

Trade Offs ◽

Research Questions ◽

Industry Professionals

This chapter presents the physiological metrics used in Games User Research (GUR). Aimed at GUR professionals in the games industry, it explains what methods are available to researchers to measure biometric data while subjects are engaged in play. It sets out when it is appropriate to use biometric measures in GUR projects, the kind of data generated, and the differing ways it can be analysed. The chapter also discusses the trade-offs required when interpreting physiological data, and will help games researchers to make informed decisions about which research questions can benefit from biometric methodologies. As the equipment needed to collect biometric data becomes more sophisticated as well as cheaper, physiological testing of players during a game’s development will become more common. At the same time, Games User Researchers will become more discriminating in its use. Where in the past professionals in the games industry have used biometric testing to generate quick, actionable feedback about player responses to elements of a game, and have been less concerned with the scientific robustness of their methodology, as GUR develops a new breed of games industry professionals are attempting to deploy good academic practice in their researches.

Download Full-text

Users roles identification on online crowdsourced Q&A platforms and encyclopedias: a survey

Journal of Computational Social Science ◽

10.1007/s42001-021-00125-9 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Akrati Saxena ◽

Harita Reddy

Keyword(s):

Network Analysis ◽

Knowledge Sharing ◽

Informal Learning ◽

Social Roles ◽

Online Discussion ◽

State Of The Art ◽

Temporal Analysis ◽

The State ◽

Open Research ◽

Research Questions

AbstractOnline informal learning and knowledge-sharing platforms, such as Stack Exchange, Reddit, and Wikipedia have been a great source of learning. Millions of people access these websites to ask questions, answer the questions, view answers, or check facts. However, one interesting question that has always attracted the researchers is if all the users share equally on these portals, and if not then how the contribution varies across users, and how it is distributed? Do different users focus on different kinds of activities and play specific roles? In this work, we present a survey of users’ social roles that have been identified on online discussion and Q&A platforms including Usenet newsgroups, Reddit, Stack Exchange, and MOOC forums, as well as on crowdsourced encyclopedias, such as Wikipedia, and Baidu Baike, where users interact with each other through talk pages. We discuss the state of the art on capturing the variety of users roles through different methods including the construction of user network, analysis of content posted by users, temporal analysis of user activity, posting frequency, and so on. We also discuss the available datasets and APIs to collect the data from these platforms for further research. The survey is concluded with open research questions.

Download Full-text

Can Financial Engineering Cure Cancer?

The American Economic Review ◽

10.1257/aer.103.3.406 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 103 (3) ◽

pp. 406-411 ◽

Cited By ~ 21

Author(s):

David E Fagnan ◽

Jose Maria Fernandez ◽

Andrew W Lo ◽

Roger M Stein

Keyword(s):

Financial Engineering ◽

Analytical Framework ◽

Capital Requirements ◽

Debt Financing ◽

Investment Projects ◽

Time Horizons ◽

Long Time ◽

Private And Public ◽

Public Equity ◽

Highly Correlated

Traditional financing sources such as private and public equity may not be ideal for investment projects with low probabilities of success, long time horizons, and large capital requirements. Nevertheless, such projects, if not too highly correlated, may yield attractive risk-adjusted returns when combined into a single portfolio. Such “megafund” portfolios may be too large to finance through private or public equity alone. But with sufficient diversification and risk analytics, debt financing via securitization may be feasible. Credit enhancements (i.e., derivatives and government guarantees) can also improve megafund economics. We present an analytical framework and illustrative empirical examples involving cancer research.

Download Full-text

Differences of perception between private and public officers in an organizing committee concerning stakeholders of an international sporting event

International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship ◽

10.1108/ijsms-08-2017-0067 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

pp. 127-142

Author(s):

Taeyeon Oh ◽

Jihyeon Oh ◽

Junhee Kim ◽

Kisung Dennis Kwon

Keyword(s):

Central Government ◽

Olympic Games ◽

Stakeholder Analysis ◽

Sporting Events ◽

Public And Private ◽

Content Type ◽

Sporting Event ◽

Private And Public ◽

Winter Olympic Games ◽

Research Questions

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate the perception of public and private officers of stakeholder at the PyeongChang Winter Olympic Games 2018. This event was selected as the subject of this research as it is the most recent mega-scale international sporting event and, given that the organizing committee (OC) is currently operating, it afforded a unique opportunity to investigate the staff of the organization. To clarify the research questions, this research identified stakeholders of Olympic Games.Design/methodology/approachThe research questions were examined by a stakeholder analysis that measured and compared perceptions conducted according to the stakeholder theory (Freeman, 2010) and previous research (Naraine et al., 2016).FindingsThis study identifies eight stakeholders of the 2018 Winter Olympic Games: the OC, the International Olympics Committee, National Olympic Committee, central government, local government, media, sponsors and non-government organizations. The authors pointed out that public officers are more sensitive to the opinions and movements of community members than private staff. Conversely, the authors found that the private staffs regard the media and influential stakeholders as more important compared with public officers.Originality/valueBased on the findings from the Olympics committee, this study contributes to the academic literature related to sporting events and their stakeholders by providing the most up-to-date identification of stakeholders.

Download Full-text

Lessons Learnt, Open Research Questions and Recommendations

Society - Water - Technology - Water Resources Development and Management ◽

10.1007/978-3-319-18971-0_17 ◽

2016 ◽

pp. 279-292

Author(s):

Christine Bismuth ◽

Bernd Hansjürgens ◽

Timothy Moss ◽

Sebastian Hoechstetter ◽

Klement Tockner ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Open Research ◽

Lessons Learnt ◽

Research Questions

Download Full-text

A comprehensive review of plus-minus ratings for evaluating individual players in team sports

International Journal of Computer Science in Sport ◽

10.2478/ijcss-2019-0001 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 18 (1) ◽

pp. 1-23 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Lars Magnus Hvattum

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Team Sports ◽

Sports Analytics ◽

Comprehensive Review ◽

Sports Events ◽

Open Research ◽

New Directions ◽

Individual Player ◽

Research Questions ◽

The Many

AbstractThe increasing availability of data from sports events has led to many new directions of research, and sports analytics can play a role in making better decisions both within a club and at the level of an individual player. The ability to objectively evaluate individual players in team sports is one aspect that may enable better decision making, but such evaluations are not straightforward to obtain. One class of ratings for individual players in team sports, known as plus-minus ratings, attempt to distribute credit for the performance of a team onto the players of that team. Such ratings have a long history, going back at least to the 1950s, but in recent years research on advanced versions of plus-minus ratings has increased noticeably. This paper presents a comprehensive review of contributions to plus-minus ratings in later years, pointing out some key developments and showing the richness of the mathematical models developed. One conclusion is that the literature on plus-minus ratings is quite fragmented, but that awareness of past contributions to the field should allow researchers to focus on some of the many open research questions related to the evaluation of individual players in team sports.

Download Full-text