MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018218384 · doi:10.5555/2663575.2663590

Inferring state for real-time monitoring of care processes

2013· article· en· W2018218384 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftware Engineering in Health Care · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Process Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)Process (computing)Computer scienceProcess miningEvent (particle physics)Service (business)Process managementState (computer science)Process modelingComputer securityWork in processBusiness processBusiness process managementOperations managementEngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patient wait times and care service times are key performance measures for care processes in hospitals. Managing the quality of care delivered by these processes in real-time is challenging. A key challenge is to correlate source medical events to infer the care process states that define patient wait times and care service times. Commercially available complex event processing engines do not have built in support for the concept of care process state. This makes it unnecessarily complex to define and maintain rules for inferring states from source medical events in a care process. In this paper, we introduce a state monitoring engine for inferring and managing states based on an application model for care process monitoring. The research is validated with a case study developed in collaboration with a large community hospital.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.228 · 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