MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2467355430 · doi:10.17230/ad-minister.28.3

Business Continuity and Disaster Risk Management in Business Education: Case of York University

2016· article· en· W2467355430 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Asgary

Bibliographic record

VenueAD-minister · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk Management
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mientras que por un lado los niveles de disrupciones en los negocios y los eventos desastrosos son crecientes, por el otro, las campañas locales, nacionales e internacionales han incrementado la consciencia, atención y demanda de las empresas con respecto a la necesidad de la gestión de la continuidad de negocio. En la medida en que más empresas buscan integrar la gestión del riesgo de desastres y de la continuidad de negocio en sus operaciones y procesos de toma de decisiones, la necesidad de dicho conocimiento también ha aumentado. Sin embargo, a pesar de estas necesidades, muchas escuelas de negocios alrededor del mundo no las han identificado, no se han dado cuenta de ellas, ni las han abordado. Si bien hay diferentes modelos para integrar la gestión del riesgo de desastres y de la continuidad de negocio en la educación de negocios, York University ha establecido programas de pregrado y posgrado sobre la gestión de desastres y emergencias en una escuela de negocios para hacer frente a estas crecientes necesidades. A través de esta integración, un número considerable de estudiantes de negocios se matriculan en cursos de gestión del riesgo de desastres y de continuidad de negocio. El conocimiento y las capacidades que los estudiantes adquieren a través de estos cursos, los convierten en actores informados y conocedores para los equipos de gestión de la continuidad de negocio de sus diferentes lugares de trabajo.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAD-ministerSame topicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207