MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1724437687

A Practical Process Model to Develop Knowledge Management Life Cycle in National Iranian South Oil Company (NISOC)

2013· article· en· W1724437687 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hasan Gholamnezhad, Rouholamin Khaksarpour, Mohsen Baradari

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of academic and applied studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordssortProcess (computing)Knowledge managementComputer scienceTacit knowledgeOrder (exchange)Knowledge baseRelation (database)Process managementBusinessArtificial intelligenceInformation retrievalData mining
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, valuable human and knowledge resources will be wasted unless management accepts and supports efforts to gather, sort, transform, record and share knowledge by an optimum implementation process. One of the most problems in some organization is that all people suggestions and comments may not be analyzed carefully. Therefore, it is missed an opportunity about tacit knowledge and experiences that have researchable nature or maybe to convert them to a researchable proposal especially in skill organization layers, whereas they could be developed and advanced by converting to a research to increase the suggestions effectiveness. In order to solving this problem, by a relation between suggestion system and R&T implementation process, all suggestions and comments are analyzed. Then, some of them are selected by R&T expert person or group in the research committee to create a RFP. At last, the R&T department results as explicit knowledge are recorded in the knowledge base and interned in the KM life cycle.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of academic and applied studiesSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207