MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008150057 · doi:10.3139/124.100253

Integrated management systems in the nuclear field

2005· article· en· W2008150057 on OpenAlexaff
I. A. Beckmerhagen, H. P. Berg, Stanislav Karapetrović, Walter Willborn

Bibliographic record

VenueKerntechnik · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Management Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsISO 14000Quality management systemFunction (biology)Risk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceField (mathematics)Management systemSystems engineeringKey (lock)Process managementQuality (philosophy)Quality assuranceEngineering managementQuality managementBusinessOperations managementEngineeringEnvironmental management systemComputer securityService (business)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the last years several internationally accepted standards such as the ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 series and other function-specific management systems standards have been developed. At the same time, it has become imperative for organisations to continuously improve their overall quality, environmental and safety performance. Therefore, the need to create integrated management systems is of growing importance to enable an easier handling of the different management systems. This paper has two main objectives. The first one is to address the key issues in the underlying theory of integrated management systems including benefits and limits, the second one is to illustrate the importance of an integrated (in particular safety) management system and the experience feedback providing examples from different areas and different organisations in the nuclear field.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKerntechnikSame topicQuality and Management SystemsFrench-language works237,207