MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148963842 · doi:10.1002/isaf.326

MODELLING THE ADAPTATION OF BUSINESS CONTINUITY PLANNING BY BUSINESSES USING NEURAL NETWORKS

2011· article· en· W2148963842 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ali Asgary, Ali Sadeghi‐Naini

Bibliographic record

VenueIntelligent systems in accounting, finance and management/Intelligent systems in accounting, finance & management · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk Management
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizationArtificial neural networkComputer scienceAdaptation (eye)Process (computing)Business continuitySet (abstract data type)Business processProcess managementData miningArtificial intelligenceOperations researchBusinessComputer securityMarketingEngineeringMathematicsWork in process

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Business continuity planning is an important element of business continuity management and is regarded as a fundamental step towards reducing the negative impacts of business disruptions caused by internal and external hazardous events. Many businesses are not prepared for such events, and very few studies have tried to examine and model the factors that contribute to business continuity management planning by various companies. In this paper we propose and develop a feed‐forward neural network for modelling businesses continuity planning by businesses based on a dataset of 283 businesses operating in the Greater Toronto Area in Ontario, Canada. The fully connected neural network applied was trained on 65 % of the dataset records using different subsets of input variables. In order to preserve the generalization ability of the trained network, 15 % of the dataset records were used as a validation set for early stopping during the network's training process. Prediction capability of the trained networks was evaluated on 20 % and never‐seen records of the dataset. The classification ability of the networks was then analysed using receiver operating characteristic and detection error trade‐off curves, where the results obtained were promising. The equal error rate for the best models was 12 %, which reflects a very good accuracy of these models in predicting the existence of business continuity planning for a generic company. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntelligent systems in accounting, finance and management/Intelligent systems in accounting, finance & managementSame topicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207