Subject. A multimodal knowledge base in the field of economics and finance. Objectives. To develop a methodology and build a prototype of a multimodal knowledge base for supporting expert decision?making. Methods. The study employed methods of systems, comparative, logical, and structural analysis, as well as deep learning techniques. Results. A methodology for constructing a multimodal knowledge base has been developed, along with a prototype demonstrating the application of modern deep learning models in economics and finance. The prototype has been implemented within the framework of the digital expert model concept as an interactive knowledge graph. It is based on collecting and processing scientific publications in economics and finance from the arXiv.org portal for the period from 2003 to 2025. The knowledge base has been enhanced with a module incorporating publications from the electronic library of the Lomonosov Moscow State University. Additionally, an interactive graph?based ontology and a question?answering system have been implemented. Conclusions. The multimodal knowledge base, as an element of the digital expert model, enables the formation of a more comprehensive and objective picture of how modern deep learning methods and models are applied in economics and finance – in real time. It also helps improve the quality and depth of scientific and technical expertise.
Dong B. A systematic review of the organizational inertia literature and future outlook. International Journal of Education and Humanities, 2023, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 119–123. DOI: 10.54097/ijeh.v8i2.7759 EDN: RPDSKP
Hannan M.T., Freeman J. Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 1984, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 149–164. DOI: 10.2307/2095567
Blyum M.A., Korobova O.V. Diagnostika i otsenka razvitiya sovremennykh predpriyatii: instrumentarii i praktika primeneniya: monografiya [Diagnostics and assessment of modern enterprises development: Tools and application practice: a monograph]. Tambov, Yukom Publ., 2025, 250 p. EDN: LJLOQY
Klemina T.N. [Ecological approach in organizational theory (preface to the section)]. Vestnik Sankt‑Peterburgskogo universiteta. Menedzhment, 2004, no. 3, pp. 138–142. (In Russ.) EDN: HSPJHN
Mkrtichyan G.A., Isaeva O.M. [Reasons for staff resistance to organizational changes: View of managers as change agents]. Organizatsionnaya psikhologiya, 2015, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 22–33. (In Russ.) EDN: TOPUKB
Murakaev I. [Organizational inertia in the context of regulating artificial intelligence in Uzbekistan: Analysis of the development paradox]. Society and Innovations, 2025, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 13–24. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.47689/2181-1415-vol6-iss6-pp13-24 EDN: NUQMEO
Valitova L.A., Tambovtsev V.L. [Organizational ecology: An economist’s view]. Rossiiskii zhurnal menedzhmenta, 2005, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 109–118. (In Russ.) EDN: HUBIFN
Zharkova E.S. [Organizational path‑dependence and unlocking path in cluster]. Global’nyi nauchnyi potentsial, 2013, no. 10, pp. 109–113. (In Russ.) EDN: RSDPPV
Sydow J., Schreyögg G., Koch J. Organizational path dependence: opening the black box. Academy of Management Review, 2009, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 689–709.
Kleiner G.B. [Spiral dynamics, system cycles and new organizational models: Pearlescent enterprises]. Rossiiskii zhurnal menedzhmenta, 2020, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 471–496. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.21638/spbu18.2020.401 EDN: JCBBIN
Dementyev V.E. [Viability of hierarchical organizations under variability of economic environment]. Rossiiskii zhurnal menedzhmenta, 2019, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 367–386. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.21638/11701/spbu18.2019.304 EDN: TMVWKD
Keum D.D., See K.E. The influence of hierarchy on idea generation and selection in the innovation process. Organization Science, 2017, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 596–780. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2017.1142
Joseph J., Gaba V. Organizational structure, information processing, and decision‑making: A retrospective and road map for research. Academy of Management Annals, 2020, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 267–302. DOI: 10.5465/annals.2017.0103 EDN: MPPHFR
Kaganer E., Gregory R.W., Sarker S. A process for managing digital transformation: An organizational inertia perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 2023, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 1005–1030. DOI: 10.17705/1jais.00819 EDN: ESHVLS
Krivosheeva‑Medyantseva D.D. [Resistance to change in an organization: A qualitative empirical study]. Journal of Economic Regulation, 2018, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 84–103. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17835/2078-5429.2018.9.2.084-103 EDN: XWOCQX
Boyer M., Robert J. Organizational inertia and dynamic incentives. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2006, vol. 59, iss. 3, pp. 324–348. DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2004.06.024
Raffaelli R., Glynn M.A., Tushman M. Frame flexibility: The role of cognitive and emotional framing in innovation adoption by incumbent firms. Strategic Management Journal, 2019, vol. 40, iss. 7, pp. 1013–1039. DOI: 10.1002/smj.3011
Teece D.J. Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 2018, vol. 51, iss. 1, pp. 40–49. DOI: 10.1016/j.lrp.2017.06.007
Porus V.N., Bazhanov V.A. [Post‑normal science: Passing the Scylla of uncertainty and the Charybdis of the politicization of knowledge]. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki, 2021, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 15–33. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17323/2587-8719-2021-4-15-33 EDN: FQPUGD
Pavlova M.V., Dzyubenko M.M., Nartova‑Bochaver S.K. [The organizational cynicism scale: An adaptation on the Russian‑speaking sample]. Sotsial’naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo, 2022, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 184–200. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17759/sps.2022130311 EDN: QAEJDJ
