MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052745835 · doi:10.3166/isi.19.3.73-92

Big data. Mise en perspective et enjeux pour les entreprises

2014· article· fr· W2052745835 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les nouveaux usages liés à la prolifération d'Internet (les réseaux sociaux, smartphones, applications mobiles…) et le progrès de la technique (utilisation des capteurs, GPS, puces RFID…) contribuent à une avalanche de données produites à grande échelle et souvent de manière non structurée. Il s'agit du phénomène Big Data. Pour les entreprises, le véritable enjeu à l'ère du Big Data est de pouvoir traiter et analyser en temps réel des flux de données importants émanant de sources différentes sous forme structurée et non structurée pour en extraire de la valeur et en tirer un avantage compétitif. En d'autres termes, un projet Big data met les entreprises face à des enjeux technologiques puisqu'une architecture adaptée doit être mise en place, à des enjeux organisationnels pour décider de la stratégie et de l'organisation des flux de données à traiter ainsi qu'à des enjeux économiques en termes de création de valeur. Dans cet article, nous présentons une mise en perspective de ces enjeux pour les entreprises.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.009
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.224 · 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