Improving Business Intelligence Traceability and Accountability
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Business Intelligence (BI) system provides users with multi-dimensional information (a so-called ‘BI product') to support decision-making. However, existing BI systems overlook the lineage metadata which supports individual data quality dimensions such as data believability and ease of understanding. Using a design science research paradigm, this paper proposes and develops an integrated framework (known as BI Product and Metacontent Map - ‘BIP-Map') to facilitate the traceability and accountability of BI products. Specifically, the business workflow layer of the integrated framework is modelled using business process modelling notation, and an information product map is used to model the second layer's information manufacturing process, whilst the third layer represents the metacontent detail of the data validation stage, from source system through to ETL, to the data warehousing stage. Also, the authors develop a BIP-Map informed prototype in collaboration with an online job advertising firm, the framework then being validated by key BI stakeholders of the firm. The integrated framework addresses individual-related data quality issues and builds user confidence by enhancing the traceability and accountability of a BI product.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it