MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032626954 · doi:10.1506/ap.7.4.4

Designing and Implementing an Information System for the Dental Office of Branckowitz & Young

2008· article· en· W2032626954 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Alex Nikitkov, Barbara Sainty

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting Perspectives · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Scope (computer science)Computer scienceService (business)Context (archaeology)Class (philosophy)Resource (disambiguation)Order (exchange)Knowledge managementProcess managementEngineering managementBusinessEngineeringMarketingManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This case provides students with the opportunity to create a functional information system (IS) for a service company. The case facilitates a guided hands‐on experience where students learn to analyze a business entity in the context of its environment; recognize what business processes comprise an entity's value chain; and develop, document, and implement a tailor‐made IS to support the entity's operation. In order to keep the amount of development realistic and the system transparent for students, the case focuses on a small service company: a dental office. The case uses a resource—events—agents (REA) analytical framework for modeling and Microsoft Access for IS implementation. The case is structured modularly, enabling instructors to either explain material or demonstrate analysis/development of a segment of an IS in class and then challenge the students to complete the module's development following the instructor's example. Instructors have the flexibility to give students fewer (or additional) directions in developing the information system, depending on the students' backgrounds and abilities. Instructors also have a choice to limit the scope of the development and implementation to any number of four business processes.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccounting PerspectivesSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207