MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bridging the gap between RFID/EPC concepts, technological requirements and supply chain e-business processes.

2010· article· en· W2041273223 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

VenueJournal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRFID technology advancements
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chainBridging (networking)BusinessProcess managementAmbiguityBusiness processConfusionComputer scienceSupply chain managementElectronic businessInternet of ThingsKnowledge managementBusiness modelMarketingWorld Wide WebWork in processComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supply chain pressures have caused some firms to reexamine their processes. In doing so, firms are exploring emerging technology such as RFID to enable seamless exchange of information within their supply chain. While RFID promised to "revolutionize" the way business processes are managed today, the impact and benefits of the technology are still unclear and ambiguous concepts such as "intelligent products", "smart supply chains" or "the internet of things" are still creating confusion within potential adopters. In this paper an attempt is made to (i) clarify the ambiguity surrounding RFID vs. other AIDC and IOS technologies such as the EPC Network (ii) specify the technology readiness & IT related requirements of actual and emerging applications, and (iii) propose a framework to highlight how the technology can be used to support RFID/EPC enabled ecommerce processes and support practitioners and academicians in assessing the impact of RFID on electronic supply chain 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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.303 · 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