Organizational semiotics : evolving a science of information systems : IFIP TC8/WG8.1 Working Conference on Organizational Semiotics : evolving a science of information systems, July 23-25, 2001, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contributors. Preface. Exploring the Explanatory Power of Actability P.J. Agerfalk, et al. Information and Knowledge Economies D. O'Connor, et al. Data, Information, and Knowledge F. Nake. Organisations as Practice Systems G. Goldkuhl, et al. Knowledge or Information E. Braf. Translation, Betrayal and Ambiguity in IS Development J. Underwood. Integrating Information Systems V.A. Martin, et al. User-System Interface Design J.H. Connolly, I.W. Phillips. Pervasive Computing and Space P.B. Andersen. Systemic Functional Hypertexts (SFHT) A. Mehler, R.J. Clarke. The Value of Information in the 'E-age' A. Verrijn-Stuart, W. Hesse. Semiosis, Information and Knowledge E. Taborsky. Dividing Businesses into Processes M. Lind. A Semiotic Approach to Quality in Requirements Specifications J. Krogstie. The Institutional Context of Information M.S.H. Heng. Seven Rules for Applying Language/Action Perspective and Organizational Semiotics Successfully J.L.G. Dietz. Towards a Semiotic Communications Quality Model A. De Moor, Hans Weigand. Semiotics and Intelligent Control M. Lind. Striking the Right Tone A. Pollard, D. Thomas. Looking Inside M.C.C. Baranauskas, et al. Levels of Abstraction in Maritime Maneuvering Operations J. Petersen. Keywords Index.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".