MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076518918 · doi:10.1115/icone12-49004

Auditing Supports the Integration of Management Systems in the Nuclear Industry

2004· article· en· W2076518918 on OpenAlexaff
I. A. Beckmerhagen, H. P. Berg, Stanislav Karapetrović, Walter Willborn

Bibliographic record

Venue12th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering, Volume 2 · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditFunction (biology)Quality management systemProcess managementInternal auditRisk analysis (engineering)Quality auditQuality (philosophy)System integrationManagement systemBusinessComputer scienceKnowledge managementEngineering managementAccountingQuality managementEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integration of function-specific management systems in organizations is rapidly becoming a topic of interest for managers and auditors alike. This is mainly due to the proliferation of management system standards that foster compliance with the stated criteria for quality, environmental, occupational health and safety, social responsibility and other function-specific aspects of performance. While most of the available literature on this topic focuses on the integration of standards, there is comparatively little information available on how to actually build an integrated system internally. This paper hypothesizes that, besides using audits for the implementation of the available procedures, audits can provide an excellent basis for these integration efforts. Therefore the prerequisites, strategies and resources necessary for an effective audit in support of integrated management systems are discussed. The paper also describes how audits are used to improve a combined quality and safety management system in a German nuclear facility.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue12th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering, Volume 2Same topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207