MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028079213 · doi:10.1108/14635770610644664

Benchmarking web site functions

2006· article· en· W2028079213 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBenchmarking An International Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Technology Governance and Strategy
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalInternational Development Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeb siteComputer scienceWeb developmentBenchmarkingWorld Wide WebWeb standardsWeb designIntranetData WebInformation retrievalWeb pageThe InternetBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose To measure, classify and compare web site functions' development. Design/methodology/approach The objectives were achieved by developing a methodology to measure, classify and compare web site functions development. The measurement was based on the presence (or absence) of 91 web site components. The classification was achieved using an applied correspondence analysis. The comparison was performed with respect to 4,485 company web sites from two provinces in Canada. A formal procedure involving 50 assistants was developed to collect data over 5,000 sites within a month period and a conceptual model was developed to interpret results. Findings Findings show that web site functions development could be described on a three dimensional space, the three axes corresponding to directions of development. The development status of the whole sample appeared as a cone in which five classes (or categories) of web sites could be identified and described with respect to their development profile. The development of 18 web site functions was also benchmarked with respect to observations within a class and with respect to some other characteristics like the industrial sector and the province where the company was located. Research limitations/implications Web site functions development was evaluated only with respect to components accessible to the general public. Development of intranet and extranet were not evaluated and hence taken into account for overall web sites development. Practical implications This research project of web site functions development was part of a more comprehensive project aimed at evaluating and documenting the impact of using a web site on business processes. So, combining the results of the two projects, allowed the authors to advance suggestions of how web sites should be developed to generate value for companies. Originality/value The approach to web site functions development evaluation is original. The methodology could be replicated anytime. The typology that emerged from the analysis is unique. Moreover, given the large sample of 4,485 web sites, results are statistically valid.

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 categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.212 · 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