MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972123371 · doi:10.5539/ies.v6n6p178

Kacang Cerdik: A Conceptual Design of an Idea Management System

2013· article· en· W1972123371 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Process Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowComputer scienceObject (grammar)Process (computing)Workflow management systemTask (project management)Knowledge managementReuseCreativityPipeline (software)Software engineeringWorld Wide WebSystems engineeringDatabaseProgramming languageArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An idea management system is where ideas are stored and then can be evaluated and analyzed. It provides the structure and the platform for users to contribute ideas for innovation and creativity. Designing and developing an idea management system is a complex task because it involves many users and lot of ideas. Some of the critical features for an idea management system are supports for the ideas generation process, stimulate users to actively participate, facilitates reuse of ideas and encourages open collaboration among the users. This paper discusses a conceptual architecture design of an idea management system called Kacang Cerdik based on three novel concepts; actor, object and workflow. In the system, an idea is an object or an entity that can be manipulated by the users. An idea as an object can be used to generate other ideas. It can also derive its features from other ideas. In this system, an idea is linked with other ideas in the system. The idea will flows from one state to another state in a single workflow. A single workflow is a process or a pipeline that consists of many states. At each of the states, an idea (an object) can manipulated by a user (an actor) based on his current role. The single workflow consists of five different states which are editing, collaborating, reviewing, publishing and evaluating. In the system, a user is an actor who has multiple roles such as a submitter, a reviewer or an evaluator. Based on this concept, a user can submit a new idea or can review an existing idea or can vote on an idea. The system also uses the concept of crowd wisdom to evaluate the ideas. Finally, the potentially viable ideas at the end of the workflow or the pipeline can be further evaluated in a new product development cycle. This conceptual design encourages open collaborations among the users, reuse of previous ideas and use of crowd wisdom in ideas evaluation. A working prototype called Kacang Cerdik has been developed using these concepts as a proof-of-concept.

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.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.406
Threshold uncertainty score0.443

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.252 · 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