MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154347951 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2012.08.005

Performance evaluation of enterprise architecture with a formal fuzzy model (FPN)

2012· article· en· W2154347951 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ashkan Marahel, Ali Harounabadi, Seyyed Javad Mirabedini

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Technology Governance and Strategy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArchitectureFuzzy logicProcess managementEnterprise architectureKnowledge managementBusinessSoftware engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preparing enterprise architecture is complicated procedure, which uses framework as structure regularity and style as the behavior director for controlling complexity. As in architecture behavior, precedence over structure, for better diagnosis of a behavior than other behaviors, there is a need to evaluate the architecture performance. Enterprise architecture cannot be organized without the benefit of the logical structure. Framework provides a logical structure for classifying architectural output. Among the common architectural framework, the C4ISR is one of the most appropriate frameworks because of the methodology of its production and the level of aggregation capability and minor revisions. C4ISR framework, in three views and by using some documents called product, describes the architecture. In this paper, for developing the systems, there are always uncertainties in information systems and we may use new version of UML called FUZZY-UML, which includes structure and behavior of the system. The proposed model of this paper also uses Fuzzy Petri nets to analyze the developed system.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.204 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicInformation Technology Governance and StrategyFrench-language works237,207