MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984933577 · doi:10.1145/1109069.1109095

To consolidate or distribute?

2006· article· en· W1984933577 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

Venueinteractions · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicService and Product Innovation
Canadian institutionsHewlett-Packard (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCohesion (chemistry)Work (physics)Service (business)Balance (ability)Customer serviceUnit (ring theory)Public relationsStrategic business unitBusiness ReviewManagementBusinessSociologyMarketingEngineeringPolitical sciencePsychologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In large companies, the processes of user-centered design (UCD)---or as these authors say, "customer-centered design (CCD)"---may be similar across business units, but the content of the work may differ dramatically from one unit to another. Thus, like many other "minority" professions, User Experience and UCD communities struggle with how to balance full involvement in and service to their business units with coordination, professional cohesion, and leadership across business units. In this month's column, our authors discuss how they and their colleagues at Hewlett Packard have been working to strengthen their professional community across the company, while preserving the ties linking practitioners and their business units. ---Susan Dray and David Siegel

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.250 · 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