MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171633351 · doi:10.1109/hicss.2008.195

Hybrid RFID-GPS Real-Time Location System for Human Resources: Development, Impacts and Perspectives

2008· article· en· W2171633351 on OpenAlexaffabout
Manon G. Guillemette, Isabelle Fontaine, Claude Caron

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkgroupGlobal Positioning SystemReal-time locating systemRadio-frequency identificationComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Identification (biology)Process (computing)Assisted GPSComputer securityReal-time computingTelecommunicationsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radio frequency identification (RFID), including real-time location systems (RTLS,) and Global Positioning Systems (GPS) are technologies that have evolved considerably in the past few years. These technologies have the potential to provide a means by which organizations can follow employees in real time. However, this permanent surveillance might have unpredictable impacts on the employee and on the organization itself. We followed the systems development research process to build a hybrid RFID-GPS system, allowing for the real-time location of human resources both indoors and outdoors. We tested this system in the security service of a Canadian university and we explored the impacts on the workgroup and its employees. Our results showed that this kind of system can work in a genuine context, and that it has distinct impacts on the individual and on the organization which are usually not observed with more traditional 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.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations33
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Crowdsensing and CrowdsourcingFrench-language works237,207