MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W12271918

Tracker: a framework to support reducing rework through decision management

2003· article· en· W12271918 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul Rayson, Bernadette Sharp, Alan Alderson, John Cartmell, Claude C. Chibelushi, Rodney J. Clarke, Alan Dix, Victor Onditi, Ariana Quek, Devina Ramduny-Ellis, Andrew M. Salter, Huma Shah, Ian Sommerville, Philip C. Windridge

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Enterprise Information Systems · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Techniques and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReworkComputer scienceNatural languageDecision support systemVariety (cybernetics)Focus (optics)Project managementArtificial intelligenceKnowledge managementSoftware engineeringSystems engineeringEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Tracker project is studying rework in systems engineering projects. Our hypothesis is that providing decision makers with information about previous relevant decisions will assist in reducing the amount of rework in a project. We propose an architecture for the flexible integration of the tools implementing the variety of theories and models used in the project. The techniques include ethnographic analysis, natural language processing, activity theory, norm analysis, and speech and handwriting recognition. In this paper, we focus on the natural language processing components, and describe experiments which demonstrate the feasibility of our text mining approach.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.009

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Conference on Enterprise Information SystemsSame topicSoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesFrench-language works237,207