MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996635863 · doi:10.1145/1370099.1370109

A QoS-based service acquisition model for IS services

2008· article· en· W1996635863 on OpenAlexaff
Xian Chen, Paul Sorenson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCustomer Service AssuranceService level objectiveService designMobile QoSService providerService delivery frameworkService (business)Software as a serviceProcess managementQuality of serviceDifferentiated serviceService systemService qualityService guaranteeKnowledge managementQuality (philosophy)BusinessSoftwareTelecommunicationsMarketingSoftware development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergence of new information system (IS) service technologies yields opportunities and challenges in identifying and monitoring quality of services that providers are delivering. Unfortunately, very few approaches have applied accurate and unbiased views on service quality that takes into account the true value of the service provided.This paper poses the definition of quality of service for IS services (QoSIS) and examines how to discover and select high-quality IS services from the viewpoint of the service customers. This will be accomplished through the development of a QoSIS-based service acquisition model by introducing a quality assurance party (QAP) and two quality notions that are respectively referred for traditional customer/provider service and SaaS (software as a service).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207