MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2290539658 · doi:10.22215/timreview/890

Q&A. How Can I Secure My Digital Supply Chain?

2015· article· en· W2290539658 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Richard Wilding, Malcolm Wheatley

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology Innovation Management Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOutsourcing and Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chainComputer securityBusinessSupply chain managementComputer scienceProcess managementSupply chain risk managementRisk analysis (engineering)Service managementMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Q. How can I secure my digital supply chain?A. CEOs and management teams know that digital security is important. But, simply making it an organizational priority is much easier than knowing how to assess the organization's security posture, and then taking appropriate actions to identify and mitigate against relevant risks in their supply chain. Yet, the issue cannot be

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0070.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1400.056

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology Innovation Management ReviewSame topicOutsourcing and Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207