MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1613235598 · doi:10.1109/picmet.1999.807942

Information processing and enabling technology in a Canadian financial services company: a study of data warehousing

2003· article· en· W1613235598 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karim K. Hirji, Justin B. Moore, Ji‐Ye Mao, Niall M. Fraser

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooIBM (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData warehouseLaggingComputer scienceData scienceData processingInformation systemExploratory researchInformation processingInformation technologyKnowledge managementDatabaseEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A data warehouse is fundamentally different from legacy application operational systems in terms of the class of data it contains, the type of processing it supports, and the design criteria it uses. As a repository of integrated information, from autonomous, distributed and heterogeneous sources, a data warehouse supports analytical processing by enabling data pattern analysis of historical information across different aggregation levels. Research into data warehousing is lagging behind industry enthusiasm for the subject and as such this emerging field of study affords researchers many exciting opportunities to tackle complex business, technical, financial and organizational issues. The purpose of this exploratory study was to develop a deeper understanding of the impact of a specific organizational change on information processing requirements and the potential of data warehousing as an enabling technology to deliver information processing capability.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.013
Science and technology studies0.0220.009
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207