MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050570824 · doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000648

Characterizing the evolving research on enterprise content management

2006· article· en· W2050570824 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

VenueEuropean Journal of Information Systems · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Systems and Technology Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtranetKnowledge managementComputer scienceInformation systemField (mathematics)Information technologyIntranetManagement information systemsContent managementInformation managementWorld Wide WebThe InternetEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Innovations in network technologies in the 1990's have provided new ways to store and organize information to be shared by people and various information systems. The term Enterprise Content Management (ECM) has been widely adopted by software product vendors and practitioners to refer to technologies used to manage the content of assets like documents, web sites, intranets, and extranets In organizational or inter-organizational contexts. Despite this practical interest ECM has received only little attention in the information systems research community. This editorial argues that ECM provides an important and complex subfield of Information Systems. It provides a framework to stimulate and guide future research, and outlines research issues specific to the field of ECM.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.205 · 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