Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Knowledge Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
These proceedings represent the work of researchers presenting at the 16th European Conference on Knowledge Management \n(ECKM 2015). We are delighted to be hosting ECKM at the University of Udine, Italy on the 3-4 September 2015. \nThe conference will be opened with a keynote from Dr Madelyn Blair from Pelerei Inc., USA on the topic “The Role of KM in \nBuilding Resilience”. On the afternoon of the first day Dr Daniela Santarelli, from Lundbeck, Italy will deliver a second keynote \nspeech. The second day will be opened by Dr John Dumay from Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. \nECKM is an established platform for academics concerned with current research and for those from the wider community \ninvolved in Knowledge Management to present their findings and ideas to peers from the KM and associated fields. ECKM is \nalso a valuable opportunity for face to face interaction with colleagues from similar areas of interests. The conference has a \nwell-established history of helping attendees advance their understanding of how people, organisations, regions and even \ncountries generate and exploit knowledge to achieve a competitive advantage, and drive their innovations forward. The \nrange of issues and mix of approaches followed will ensure an interesting two days. \n260 abstracts were initially received for this conference. However, the academic rigor of ECKM means that, after the double \nblind peer review process there are 102 academic papers, 15 PhD research papers, 1 Masters research papers and 7 Work in \nProgress papers published in these Conference Proceedings. \nThese papers reflect the continuing interest and diversity in the field of Knowledge Management, and they represent truly \nglobal research from many different countries, including Algeria, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, \nCuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, France, Germany, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, \nItaly, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Lithuania, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, \nSouth Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sultanate of Oman, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, The Netherlands, UK, United Arab \nEmirates, USA and Venezuela. \nWe hope that you have an enjoyable conference. \nMaurizzio Massaro and Andrea Garlatti \nThe University of Udine, Italy \nSeptember 2015
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".