MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Effects of Enterprise Portals on Knowledge Management Projects

2007· book-chapter· en· W199070697 on OpenAlexaff
Rodrigo Baroni de Carvalho, Marta Araújo Tavares Ferreira, Chun Wei Choo, Ricardo Vidigal da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2007
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicKnowledge Management and Sharing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge managementBusinessRelevance (law)Information technologyValuation (finance)Computer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an attempt to consolidate various departmental intranets, organizations are constructing corporate intranets or portals(Choo, Detlor, & Turnbull, 2000). They are becoming single points of entry through which users and communities can perform their business tasks, and also evolving into virtual places where people can get in touch with other people who share common interests. Due to this evolution from intranets towards portals, many organizations are using them as the major technological infrastructure of their knowledge management (KM) initiatives. KM studies analyze people, organizations, processes and technology. Although technology is not the main component of KM, it would be naïve to implement KM without considering any technological support. KM is of particular relevance to information science and information system research because technologies play a critical role in shaping organizational efforts for knowledge creation, acquisition, integration, valuation, and use (Sambarmurthy & Subramani, 2005).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.002

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 head0.306
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicKnowledge Management and SharingFrench-language works237,207