MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096437320 · doi:10.15353/joci.v3i1.2387

Using System Dynamics to Construct Design Theory for Community Information Systems

2007· article· en· W2096437320 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

VenueThe Journal of Community Informatics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Source Software Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDesigntheoryConstruct (python library)Management scienceDevelopment (topology)Process (computing)System dynamicsDevelopment theoryDesign processInformation systemSystems designSystems theoryEngineering design processSystems engineeringHuman–computer interactionSoftware engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringWork in processMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual communities are complex and evolving socio-technical systems. The design of community information systems requires much theoretical research to solve design problems. A design theory is a prescriptive theory which helps optimize design methods. Community IS design theory is still very young and fragmented, however. In the design theory development process, a mix of theory components is used to solve novel problems or existing problems more effectively and efficiently. We present a meta-model of IS development which focuses on the role of theory in IS design. We show how simulation via system dynamics could play an important role in a more systematic development of design theory for community information systems.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.242 · 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