MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1862139890 · doi:10.9776/14301

ProjectTales: Reusing Change Decisions and Rationales in Project Management

2014· article· en· W1862139890 on OpenAlexaff
Lu Xiao, Taraneh Khazaei

Bibliographic record

VenueiConference 2014 Proceedings · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReuseComputer scienceProcess managementBusinessEngineeringWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Changes are inevitable in project management and project managers are often required to make change decisions that may have significant effects on the success of the project. To support project managers’ decision-making process in such common cases, we have designed and developed a tool called ProjectTales. This tool takes advantage of the valuable information buried in the history of projects and provides various visual and interactive representations of the previous changes. Using ProjectTales, project managers can explore the history of projects, find the change situations similar to their current one, interpret the impact of the change decision, and potentially reuse the decision and the rationale of the change. We are currently planning a user evaluation to compare our tool with a baseline system.

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)0.000
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 score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiConference 2014 ProceedingsSame topicData Visualization and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207