MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Business Intelligence analytics without conventional data warehousing

2010· article· en· W2127561242 on OpenAlexaff
Waqar Haque, B. Demerchant

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness intelligenceAgile software developmentComputer scienceAnalyticsData warehouseInvestment (military)Data scienceBusiness analyticsData analysisRisk analysis (engineering)Knowledge managementData miningBusinessSoftware engineeringBusiness modelBusiness analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The implementation of a Business Intelligence (BI) solution in an environment where traditional barriers prohibit incorporating analytics in operational and strategic decision making remains challenging. The solution must overcome a very tight budget, severe restrictions on data access due to security concerns, and a tradition of using conventional legacy tools for primary reporting. We propose a method that minimizes both the ETL (Extract Transform Load) and data warehousing components of the solution and allows for agile development and incremental adoption. This is achieved by taking advantage of the organization's current legacy reporting structure as the basis and then building a BI reporting layer on top for a high level view of the information. Our methodology has demonstrated benefits in the form of reduced complexity, reduced risk, reduced cost in both time and money, and a solution that provides a greater return on investment.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207