Profiling and Prioritizing Export Success in a Technopark with LLM-Based Feature Extraction, Explainable Machine Learning, and Fuzzy MCDM
Keywords:
Technology parks, Export prediction, Natural language processing, Explainable artificial intelligence, Resource allocationAbstract
Science and technology parks function as primary instruments of regional innovation policy designed to accelerate economic development. However, the evaluation literature predominantly estimates average historical park effects rather than identifying specific tenant firms requiring targeted public support, leaving park administrators without objective tools for allocating scarce resources. The purpose of this research is to address this resource allocation problem by developing a data-driven decision support framework that systematically profiles and prioritizes tenant firms based on their empirical export potential. The methodology applies a large language model to extract technological complexity metrics from 557 unstructured administrative project narratives. It then utilizes explainable machine learning classifiers to predict firm-level export success and translates the resulting algorithmic feature attributions into objective criterion weights for a fuzzy multi-criteria prioritization model. The principal results indicate that park-specific institutional tenure and realized research revenue are the dominant predictors of commercial export success. The regularized predictive model achieves strong out-of-sample classification performance, while the extracted textual innovation scores provide additional predictive information beyond traditional headcount metrics. The results demonstrate that integrating natural language processing with explainable artificial intelligence provides a data-driven alternative to subjective expert judgments in resource allocation. The resulting prioritization framework provides policymakers with an auditable and reproducible tool for effectively targeting internationalization grants and optimizing the distribution of public innovation incentives.
Downloads
References
Lindelöf, P., & Löfsten, H. (2002). Growth, management and financing of new technology-based firms—assessing value-added contributions of firms located on and off science parks. Omega, 30(3), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(02)00023-3
Squicciarini, M. (2008). Science parks’ tenants versus out-of-park firms: Who innovates more? A duration model. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(1), 45–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-007-9037-z
Squicciarini, M. (2009). Science parks: Seedbeds of innovation? A duration analysis of firms’ patenting activity. Small Business Economics, 32(2), 169–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-007-9075-9
Albahari, A., Barge-Gil, A., Pérez-Canto, S., & Landoni, P. (2023). The effect of science and technology parks on tenant firms: A literature review. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 48(4), 1489–1531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-022-09949-7
T.C. Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanlığı. (2026). Teknoloji Geliştirme Bölgeleri İstatistiki Bilgiler (data as of end-February 2026). Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Industry and Technology, Ankara. https://www.sanayi.gov.tr/istatistikler/istatistiki-bilgiler/mi0203011501
Taş, E., & Erdil, E. (2024). Effectiveness of R&D tax incentives in Turkey. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 15(2), 6226–6272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01326-5
Teng, T., Zhang, Y., Si, Y., Chen, J., & Cao, X. (2020). Government support and firm innovation performance in Chinese science and technology parks: The perspective of firm and sub‐park heterogeneity. Growth and Change, 51(2), 749–770. https://doi.org/10.1111/grow.12372
Bellstam, G., Bhagat, S., & Cookson, J. A. (2021). A text-based analysis of corporate innovation. Management Science, 67(7), 4004–4031. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2020.3682
Kelly, B., Papanikolaou, D., Seru, A., & Taddy, M. (2021). Measuring technological innovation over the long run. American Economic Review: Insights, 3(3), 303–320. https://doi.org/10.1257/aeri.20190499
Micocci, F., & Rungi, A. (2023). Predicting exporters with machine learning. World Trade Review, 22(5), 584–607. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474745623000265
Durak, İ., Arslan, H. M., & Özdemir, Y. (2022). Application of AHP–TOPSIS methods in technopark selection of technology companies: Turkish case. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 34(10), 1109–1123. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2021.1925242
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050207
Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179–191. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250140303
Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (1989). Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science, 35(12), 1504–1511. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.12.1504
Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2(1), 88–115. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.88
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14(1), 319–338. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.14.080188.001535
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553
Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2002.6587995
Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 461–477. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199805)19:5<461::AID-SMJ953>3.0.CO;2-L
Lindelöf, P., & Löfsten, H. (2003). Science park location and new technology-based firms in Sweden–implications for strategy and performance. Small Business Economics, 20(3), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022861823493
Lecluyse, L., Knockaert, M., & Spithoven, A. (2019). The contribution of science parks: A literature review and future research agenda. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 44(2), 559–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-09712-x
Theeranattapong, T., Pickernell, D., & Simms, C. (2021). Systematic literature review paper: The regional innovation system–university–science park nexus. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 46(6), 2017–2050. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-020-09837-y
Rui, C., Lokshin, B., & Mohnen, P. (2023). Heterogeneity in performance of science and technology parks in China: Is there “club” convergence? Papers in Regional Science, 102(6), 1145–1168. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12759
Akçomak, İ. S., & Taymaz, E. (2004). Assessing the effectiveness of incubators: The case of Turkey. ERC Working Paper 04/12, Middle East Technical University.
Vaidyanathan, G. (2008). Technology parks in a developing country: The case of India. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 285–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-007-9041-3
Gentzkow, M., Kelly, B., & Taddy, M. (2019). Text as data. Journal of Economic Literature, 57(3), 535–574. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20181020
Dell, M. (2025). Deep learning for economists. Journal of Economic Literature, 63(1), 5–58. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20241733
Korinek, A. (2023). Generative AI for economic research: Use cases and implications for economists. Journal of Economic Literature, 61(4), 1281–1317. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20231736
Arts, S., Hou, J., & Gomez, J. C. (2021). Natural language processing to identify the creation and impact of new technologies in patent text: Code, data, and new measures. Research Policy, 50(2), 104144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104144
Bowen, D. E., III, Frésard, L., & Hoberg, G. (2023). Rapidly evolving technologies and startup exits. Management Science, 69(2), 940–967. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4362
Gilardi, F., Alizadeh, M., & Kubli, M. (2023). ChatGPT outperforms crowd workers for text-annotation tasks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(30), e2305016120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2305016120
Brand, J., Israeli, A., & Ngwe, D. (2023). Using LLMs for market research. Harvard Business School (Working Paper No. 23–062). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4395751
Li, P., Castelo, N., Katona, Z., & Sarvary, M. (2024). Frontiers: Determining the validity of large language models for automated perceptual analysis. Marketing Science, 43(2), 254–266. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2023.0454
Carlson, N. A., & Burbano, V. (2026). The use of LLMs to annotate data in management research: Foundational guidelines and warnings. Strategic Management Journal, 47(3), 699–725. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.70023
Feuerriegel, S., Hartmann, J., Janiesch, C., & Zschech, P. (2024). Generative AI. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 66(1), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-023-00834-7
Çelik, E., & Dalyan, T. (2023). Unified benchmark for zero-shot Turkish text classification. Information Processing & Management, 60(3), 103298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2023.103298
Lessmann, S., Baesens, B., Seow, H. V., & Thomas, L. C. (2015). Benchmarking state-of-the-art classification algorithms for credit scoring: An update of research. European Journal of Operational Research, 247(1), 124–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.05.030
Dumitrescu, E., Hué, S., Hurlin, C., & Tokpavi, S. (2022). Machine learning for credit scoring: Improving logistic regression with non-linear decision-tree effects. European Journal of Operational Research, 297(3), 1178–1192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2021.06.053
Xia, Y., Liu, C., Li, Y., & Liu, N. (2017). A boosted decision tree approach using Bayesian hyper-parameter optimization for credit scoring. Expert Systems with Applications, 78, 225–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.02.017
Ben Jabeur, S., Stef, N., & Carmona, P. (2023). Bankruptcy prediction using the XGBoost algorithm and variable importance feature engineering. Computational Economics, 61(2), 715–741. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-021-10227-1
Lundberg, S. M., & Lee, S.-I. (2017). A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. In Advances in neural information processing systems (Vol. 30). Curran Associates. https://papers.nips.cc/paper/7062-a-unified-approach-to-interpreting-model-predictions
Vabalas, A., Gowen, E., Poliakoff, E., & Casson, A. J. (2019). Machine learning algorithm validation with a limited sample size. PLOS ONE, 14(11), e0224365. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224365
Chen, Y., Calabrese, R., & Martin-Barragan, B. (2024). Interpretable machine learning for imbalanced credit scoring datasets. European Journal of Operational Research, 312(1), 357–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2023.06.036
Chen, C. T. (2000). Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(97)00377-1
Özsoy, V. S., Belgin, Ö., & Balkan, D. (2022). A novel approach for determining common weights in two division network DEA: A case study of science and technology parks in Turkey. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 34(10), 1124–1138. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2021.1947491
Ahmed, M., Dogru, A., Zhang, C., & Meng, C. (2025). Learning-based multi-criteria decision model for site selection problems. [Preprint]. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2504.04055
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Abdullah Kürşat Merter, Murat Çemberci, Fahim Jaman (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.