MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465156867 · doi:10.17705/1jais.00099

Research in Information Systems Analysis and Design: Introduction to the Special Issue

2006· article· en· W2465156867 on OpenAlex
Juhani Iivari, Jeffrey Parsons, Yair Wand

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInformation Systems Theories and Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation systemComputer scienceManagement information systemsKnowledge managementEngineeringManagement science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information systems analysis and design (ISAD) arguably lies in the core of the Information Systems (IS) discipline. Although ISAD is central to the IS curriculum, it remains somewhat at the periphery of research in leading journals. A recent study (Vessey, Ramesh, and Glass 2002) showed that few of the articles published in five leading IS research journals from 1995 to 1999 deal with these topics. This special issue is the outcome of a special joint initiative between the Journal of the Association for Information Systems (JAIS) and the Communications of the Association for Information Systems (CAIS), with the purpose of beginning to fill this void and to attract the attention of researchers to this important area. The papers in this issue illustrate a range of ISAD topics - conceptual modeling, database design, and the role of knowledge management in systems development project performance.

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.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.006
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.318 · 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