MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085148999 · doi:10.1049/iet-sen.2013.0204

Analysis of risks faced by information technology offshore outsourcing service providers

2014· article· en· W2085148999 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

VenueIET Software · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOutsourcing and Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityThompson Rivers University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutsourcingService providerOffshore outsourcingBusinessSubmarine pipelineProcess managementService (business)Engineering managementOffshoringComputer scienceKnowledge managementRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To gain competitive advantage, organisations are considering information technology (IT) outsourcing as a strategic option by concentrating on their core operations and by reducing their operating costs. Many organisations are offering outsourcing services from various parts of the world. There are certain risks factors which IT outsourcing service providers come across while managing their service operations. Risk‐related data from 50 Indian IT outsourcing service providers about their risks and concerns have been collected and archived. This study identifies risks from the providers’ perspective in regard to offshore outsourcing and put forward some guidelines to mitigate such risks.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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