Display and optoelectronic devices / Electronic information and digital technology / Core components and digital hardware Sub-industry and Supply-chain Study

Comparative structure study

The largest recorded reporting jurisdiction, Jiangsu, contains 34 records (21.1% of this 161-record cohort). The remaining cohort contains 127 records. The comparison concerns archive composition.

The recorded reporting jurisdiction label Shenzhen accounts for 6.2% here (10/161), compared with 15.1% in the parent set (473/3,137), an absolute gap of 8.9 percentage points.

70/161 companies link to pages with existing source-supported excerpts (43.5% of the cohort). The other 91 records remain usable for archive composition, but do not support new operating case studies.

An ID-deduplicated archive snapshot, not the whole market, current recognition or operating results.

The parent set, Electronic information and digital technology / Core components and digital hardware, contains 3,137 records. This cohort contributes 161 (5.1%); 2,976 records remain after excluding it.

The parent set, Display and optoelectronic devices, contains 173 records. This cohort contributes 161 (93.1%); 12 records remain after excluding it.

Ratio of label participation, not market share; multi-label counts overlap.

Excluding this cohort, the recorded reporting jurisdiction label Shenzhen covers 463/2,976 remaining records (15.6%), an absolute gap of 9.3 percentage points from this cohort.

The full reporting jurisdiction distribution has 28 labels; the top 3 contain 64/161 records (39.8%).Other known labels contain 97 records.

For 161 records with known labels, the effective category count is 11.8, versus 28 actual labels. Definitions and scope are in the methodology.

The table shows ten labels; 18 others are included in the calculations above.

Record counts do not rank supply capability or economic size.

The largest intersection, Jiangsu × Next-generation information technology, contains 34 records, or 100.0% of the 34 records carrying the Jiangsu label.

A cell contains company IDs carrying both labels. It does not establish procurement, supply or investment relationships between firms. Multi-label cells may overlap.

This page displays 8 of the full cross-tab’s 30 non-empty cells; the other 22 remain in the analysis.

Non-empty fields are not necessarily accurate or supported by originals.

Counts concern existing reviewed bilingual excerpts, not re-certification of originals or entire reports.

35 of this cohort’s 161 records link through existing company-ID mappings to 2026 lists from all jurisdictions (21.7%). This intersection measures list linkage, not successful recognition or company growth.

List rows and company IDs are separate counts, not new firms or final recognition.

Shared records with Display Optoelectronic Keyword Candidate Study: 161; records in this cohort but outside that set: 0. The intersection/union ratio is 27.2%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Shared records with Next-generation information technology / Electronic information and digital technology / Core components and digital hardware Supply-chain Study: 159; records in this cohort but outside that set: 2. The intersection/union ratio is 5.6%, a measure of label overlap rather than business collaboration. Read comparison

Stable-ID samples, not rankings; metrics use the full cohort.