MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973518141 · doi:10.3166/jds.11.383-404

Decision Support for Project Management using A Chronographic Approach

2002· article· en· W1973518141 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Decision System · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDecision support systemProcess managementOperations researchBusinessArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Generally, the utilisation of the traditional scheduling methods represents a complex and lengthy task for most of the project managers. The existing project management software imposes often an important preparation period and the quality of graphical output of the planning job is questionable. In this article, we propose a new decision approach based on a chronographic representation of the schedule, which could simulate the real conditions of the project and as such, could be considered a flexible new toll for project planning. This planning model is design to be comprehensive enough to encompass the reality of the projects and to be auto-adaptive. We will show the benefits of the chronographic modelling coupled with knowledge-based to produce a more effective tool, especially for an inexperienced project manager. Pour plusieurs entrepreneurs, l'utilisation des méthodes de planification habituelles est une tâche compliquée qui génère des coûts importants et parfois injustifiés. Les logiciels de planification existants imposent un travail de préparation onéreux. De plus, la visualisation des outils informatiques qui présentent ces plannings laisse à désirer et la convivialité d'interface de communication reste modeste. Ces limites découragent les moyennes et les petites entreprises d'informatiser la planification et la gestion de leurs projets. Nous proposons, dans cet article, un outil d'aide à la décision basé sur une nouvelle approche de modélisation chronographique, flexible et claire qui simule la réalité des projets et qui se veut un outil efficace aux besoins des gestionnaires de projets. Keywords: PlanningSchedulingChronographTime-ScaledCPMDDSMots clés: planificationéchéancierchronographeéchelle du tempsCPMSIAD

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

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 communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.177 · 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