MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009491687 · doi:10.1145/1985394.1985402

Business process performance prediction on a tracked simulation model

2011· article· en· W2009491687 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Process Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsComputer scienceProcess (computing)Key (lock)Performance predictionBusiness processParticle filterBusiness process modelingSoftwareBusiness process managementPerformance indicatorReal-time computingFilter (signal processing)SimulationWork in processEngineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Business processes need to achieve key performance indicators with minimum resources in changing operating conditions. Changes include hardware and software failures, load variation and variations in user interaction with the system. By incorporating simulation in the prediction model it is possible to predict with more confidence system performance degradations. We present our dynamic predictive model which uses forecasting techniques on historical process performance estimates for business process optimization. The parameters of the simulation model are estimates tuned at run-time by tracking the system with a particle filter.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

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 communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBusiness Process Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207